Methods for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions: A systematic review

Drug Safety

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 21-37

  Agbabiaka, Taofikat B ^a   Savović, Jelena ^b   Ernst, Edzard ^a  

^a PENINSULA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Adverse drug reactions

Indexed keywords

HERBACEOUS AGENT; VITAMIN;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; ALGORITHM; AUTOMATION; BAYES THEOREM; CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DRUG INFORMATION; DRUG MONITORING; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; EMBASE; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INTROSPECTION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL EXPERT; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; POSTMARKETING SURVEILLANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE; RATING SCALE; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; STANDARDIZATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; VALIDITY;

EID: 37549039761     PISSN: 01145916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00002018-200831010-00003     Document Type: Review

References (74)

1. Schneeweiss S, Hasford J, Gottler M, et al. Admissions caused by adverse drug events to internal medicine and emergency departments in hospitals: a longitudinal population-based study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 58: 285-91
2. Prince BS, Goetz CM, Rihn TL, et al. Drug-related emergency department visits and hospital admissions. Am J Hosp Pharm 1992; 49: 1696-700
3. Liu BA, Knowles SR, Mittmann N, et al. Reporting of fatal adverse drug reactions. Can J Clin Pharmacol 2001; 8: 84-8
4. Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 1998; 279: 1200-5
5. World Health Organization (WHO), Uppsala Monitoring Centre. The use of the WHO-UMC system for standardized case causality assessment. WHO [online]. Available from URL: http://www.who-umc.org/graphics/4409.pdf [Accessed 2007 Oct 26]
6. Macedo AF, Marques FB, Ribeiro CF, et al. Causality assessment of adverse drug reactions: comparison of the results obtained from published decisional algorithms and from the evaluations of an expert panel. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2005; 14: 885-90
7. Arimone Y, Begaud B, Miremont-Salame G, et al. Agreement of expert judgment in causality assessment of adverse drug reactions. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 61: 169-73
8. Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc R Soc Med 1965; 85: 295-300
9. Hutchinson TA, Lane DA. Assessing methods for causality assessment of suspected adverse drug reactions. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 5-16
10. Wiholm BE. The Swedish drug-event assessment methods. Special workshop - regulatory. Drug Inf J 1984; 18: 267-9
11. Miremont G, Haramburu F, Begaud B, et al. Adverse drug reactions: physicians' opinions versus a causality assessment method. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1994; 46: 285-9
12. Irey NS. Tissue reactions to drugs. Am J Pathol 1976; 82: 613-48
13. Karch FE, Lasagna L. Toward the operational identification of adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1977; 21: 247-54
14. Dangoumau J, Evreux JC, Jouglard J. Method for determination of undesirable effects of drugs [in French]. Therapie 1978; 33: 373-81
15. Begaud B, Evreux JC, Jouglard J, et al. Imputation of the unexpected or toxic effects of drugs: actualization of the method used in France. Therapie 1985; 40: 111-8
16. Kramer MS, Leventhal JM, Hutchinson TA, et al. An algorithm for the operational assessment of adverse drug reactions: I. Background, description, and instructions for use. JAMA 1979; 242: 623-32
17. Blanc S, Leuenberger P, Berger JP, et al. Judgments of trained observers on adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1979; 25: 493-8
18. Emanueli A, Sacchetti G. An algorithm for the classification of untoward events in large scale clinical trials. Agents Actions Suppl. 1980; 7: 318-22
19. Naranjo CA, Busto U, Sellers EM, et al. A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981; 30: 239-45
20. Jones JK. Adverse drug reactions in the community health setting: approaches to recognizing, counseling, and reporting. Fam Community Health 1982; 5: 58-67
21. Evreux JC, Loupi E, Descotes J, et al. Evaluation of the documentation on adverse effects of drugs: proposition 2. Imputability [in French]. Therapie 1982; 37: 657-70
22. Kitaguchi T, Nojiri T, Suzuki S, et al. Some assessment systems for industry post marketing adverse drug reaction (ADR) Information. Iyakuhin Kenkyu 1983; 14: 980-92
23. Lagier G, Vincens M, Castot A. Imputability in drug monitoring: principles of the balanced drug reaction assessment method and principal errors to avoid. Therapie 1983; 38: 303-18
24. Cornelli U. The phase IV monitoring studies: example of Naproxen Na multi-centre Italian trial. In: Crescioni C, James JM, editors. Postmarketing clinical trials - the phase V studies. Paris: Editions de Santé, 1984: 89-105
25. Stephens MD. Assessment of causality in industrial setting. Special workshop - industrial. Drug Inf J 1984; 18: 307-13
26. Castle WM. Assessment of causality in industrial settings. Drug Inf J 1984; 18: 297-302
27. Turner WM. The Food and Drug Administration algorithm. Special workshop - regulatory. Drug Inf J 1984; 18: 259-66
28. Venulet J, Ciucci A, Berneker GC. Standardised assessment of drug-adverse reaction associations: rationale and experience. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1980; 18: 381-8
29. Loupi E, Ponchon AC, Ventre JJ, et al. Imputability of a teratogenic effect [in French]. Therapie 1986; 41: 207-10
30. Stricker BHC. Diagnosis and causality assessment of drug-induced hepatic injury. In: Dukes MNG, ed. Drug-induced hepatic injury. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1985: 1-13
31. Benichou C, Danan G. Causality assessment in the European pharmaceutical industry: presentation of the preliminary results of a new method. Drug Inf J 1992; 26: 589-92
32. Hoskins RE, Mannino S. Causality assessment of adverse drug reactions using decision support and informatics tools. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1992; 1: 235-49
33. Danan G, Benichou C. Causality assessment of adverse reactions to drugs: I. A novel method based on the conclusions of international consensus meetings: application to drug-induced liver injuries. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46: 1323-30
34. Hsu PH, Stoll RW. Causality assessment of adverse events in clinical trials: II. An algorithm for drug causality assessment. Drug Inf J 1993; 27: 387-94
35. Maria VA, Victorino RM. Development and validation of a clinical scale for the diagnosis of drug-induced hepatitis. Hepatology 1997; 26: 664-9
36. Koh Y, Shu CL. A new algorithm to identify the causality of adverse drug reactions. Drug Saf 2005; 28: 1159-61
37. Horn JR, Hansten PD, Chan LN. Proposal for a new tool to evaluate drug interaction cases. Ann Pharmacother 2007; 41: 674-80
38. Mashford ML. The Australian method of drug-event assessment. Special Workshop - regulatory. Drug Inf J 1984; 18: 271-3
39. Lane DA, Kramer MS, Hutchinson TA, et al. The causality assessment of adverse drug reactions using a Bayesian approach. Pharm Med 1987; 2: 265-83
40. Hutchinson TA, Dawid AP, Spiegelhalter DJ, et al. Computerized aids for probabilistic assessment of drug safety: I. A spreadsheet program. Drug Inf J 1991; 25: 29-39
41. Hutchinson TA. Computerized Bayesian ADE assessment. Drug Inf J 1991; 25: 235-41
42. Lanctot KL, Kwok MCO, Naranjo CA. Computerized Bayesian evaluation of adverse events. Drug Inf J 1995; 29: 319-25
43. Meyboom RHB, Hekster YA, Egberts ACG, et al. Causal or casual? The role of causality assessment in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997; 17: 374-89
44. Meyboom RHB. Causality assessment revisited. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1998; 7 Suppl. 1: S63-5
45. Macedo AF, Marques FB, Ribeiro CF, et al. Causality assessment of adverse drug reactions: comparison of the results obtained from published decisional algorithms and from the evaluations of an expert panel, according to different levels of imputability. J Clin Pharm Ther 2003; 28: 137-43
46. Karch FE, Smith CL, Kerzner B, et al. Adverse drug reactions: a matter of opinion. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1976; 19: 489-92
47. Arimone Y, Begaud B, Miremont-Salame G, et al. A new method for assessing drug causation provided agreement with experts' judgment. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 308-14
48. Venulet J. Aspects of standardization as applied to the assessment of drug-event associations. Drug Inf J 1984; 18: 199-210
49. Begaud B. Standardized assessment of adverse drug reactions: the method used in France. Special workshop - clinical. Drug Inf J 1984; 18: 275-81
50. Lanctot KL, Naranjo CA. Computer-assisted evaluation of adverse events using a Bayesian approach. J Clin Pharmacol 1994; 34: 142-7
51. Leventhal JM, Hutchinson TA, Kramer MS, et al. An algorithm for the operational assessment of adverse drug reactions: III. Results of tests among clinicians. JAMA 1979; 242: 1991-4
52. Venulet J. Recognition and assessment of adverse drug reactions in children. Bratisl Lek Listy 1991; 92: 540-3
53. Frick PA, Cohen LG, Rovers JP. Algorithms used in adverse drug event reports: a comparative study. Ann of Pharmacother 1997; 31: 164-7
54. Hutchinson TA, Leventhal JM, Kramer MS, et al. An algorithm for the operational assessment of adverse drug reactions: II. Demonstration of reproducibility and validity. JAMA 1979; 242: 633-8
55. Karch FE, Lasagna L. Adverse drug reactions: a critical review. JAMA 1975; 234: 1236-41
56. Kane-Gill SL, Kirisci L, Pathak DS. Are the Naranjo criteria reliable and valid for determination of adverse drug reactions in the intensive care unit? Ann Pharmacother 2005; 39: 1823-7
57. Venulet J, Ciucci AG, Berneker GC. Updating of a method for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol 1986; 24: 559-68
58. Benichou C. Criteria of drug-induced liver disorders. Report of an International Consensus Meeting. J Hepatol 1990; 11: 272-6
59. Naranjo CA, Lane D, Ho-Asjoe M, et al. A Bayesian assessment of idiosyncratic adverse reactions to new drugs: Guillain-Barre syndrome and zimeldine. J Clin Pharmacol 1990; 30: 174-80
60. Naranjo CA, Lanctot KL. A consultant's view on the role of Bayesian differential diagnosis in the safety assessment of pharmaceuticals. Drug Inf J 1992; 26: 593-601
61. Naranjo CA, Lanctot KL, Lane DA. The Bayesian differential diagnosis of neutropenia associated with antiarrhythmic agents. J Clin Pharmacol 1990; 30: 1120-7
62. Pere JC, Begaud B, Haramburu F, et al. Computerized comparison of six adverse drug reaction assessment procedures. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1986; 40: 451-61
63. Ennis M, Ohmann C, Lorenz W, et al. Prediction of risk for pseudoallergic reactions and histamine release in patients undergoing anaesthesia and surgery: a computer-aided model using independence-Bayes. Agents Actions 1988; 23: 366-9
64. Koch-Weser J, Sellers EM, Zacest R. The ambiguity of adverse drug reactions. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1977; 11: 75-8
65. Benichou C, Danan G, Flahault A. Causality assessment of adverse reactions to drugs: II. An original model for validation of drug causality assessment methods: case reports with positive rechallenge. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46: 1331-6
66. Michel DJ, Knodel LC. Comparison of three algorithms used to evaluate adverse drug reactions. Am J Hosp Pharm 1986; 43: 1709-14
67. Busto U, Naranjo CA, Sellers EM. Comparison of two recently published algorithms for assessing the probability of adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1982; 13: 223-7
68. Kramer MS. Assessing causality of adverse drug reactions: global introspection and its limitations. Drug Inf J 1986; 20: 433-7
69. Hutchinson TA, Flegel KM, HoPingKong H, et al. Reasons for disagreement in the standardized assessment of suspected adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1983; 34: 421-6
70. Stephens MD. The diagnosis of adverse medical events associated with drug treatment. Adverse Drug React Acute Poisoning Rev 1987; 6: 1-35
71. Naranjo CA, Kwok MC, Lanctot KL, et al. Enhanced differential diagnosis of anticonvulsant hypersensitivity reactions by an integrated Bayesian and biochemical approach. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1994; 56: 564-75
72. Aronson JK, Ferner RE. Clarification of terminology in drug safety. Drug Saf 2005; 28: 851-70
73. Castle W. Adverse drug reactions: scope and limitations of causality assessment and the use of algorithms. Int J Risk Saf Med 1991; 2: 185-91
74. Kelly WN. The quality of published adverse drug event reports: review. Ann Pharmacother 2003; 37: 1774-8