An experimental investigation of masking in the US FDA adverse event reporting system database

Drug Safety

Volumn 33, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 1117-1133

  Wang, Hsin Wei ^a   Hochberg, Alan M ^b   Pearson, Ronald K ^b   Hauben, Manfred ^a,c,d,e  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

^b ProSanos Corporation   (United States)

^c NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d NEW YORK MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^e BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Pharmacovigilance; Postmarketing surveillance; Statistics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA BASE; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HUMAN; MASKING; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED STATES; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DATA MINING; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DRUG TOXICITY; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; HUMANS; MEDICAL INFORMATICS COMPUTING; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 78549253881     PISSN: 01145916     EISSN: 11791942     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11584390-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Gould AL. Practical pharmacovigilance analysis strategies. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12: 559-74
2. Almenoff J, Tonning JM, Gould AL, et al. Perspectives on the use of data mining in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 2005; 28 (11): 981-1007
3. EMEA Eudravigilance Expert Working Group (EV-EWG). Guideline on the use of statistical signal detection methods in the Eudravigilance data analysis system, 26 June 2008. London. Doc. Ref. EMEA/106464/2006 rev.1 [online]. Available from URL http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en- GB/document-library/ Regulatory-and-procedural-guide line/2009/11/WC500011434.pdf [Accessed 2010 Sep 6].
4. Hauben M, Madigan D, Gerrits CM, et al. The role of data mining in pharmacovigilance. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2005 Sep; 4 (5): 929-48
5. Hauben M, Hochberg A. The importance of reporting negative findings in data mining: the example of exenatide and pancreatitis. Pharmaceut Med 2008; 22 (4): 215-9
6. Zeinoun Z, Seifert H, Verstraeten T. Quantitative signal detection for vaccines: effects of stratification, background and masking on GlaxoSmithKline's spontaneous reports database. Hum Vaccines 2009; 5 (9): 599-607
7. Hauben M, Aronson JK. Defining 'signal' and its subtypes in pharmacovigilance based on a systematic review of previous definitions. Drug Saf 2009; 32 (2): 99-110
8. Hauben M, Reich L. Response to letter by Levine et al. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 61 (1): 115-7
9. Hochberg AM, Reisinger SJ, Pearson RK, et al. Using data mining to predict safety actions from FDA adverse event reporting system data. Drug Inf J 2007; 41 (5): 633-44
10. Hauben M, Noren GN. A decade of data mining and still counting. Drug Saf 2010; 33 (7): 527-34
11. Hauben M, Madigan D, Hochberg AM, et al. Data mining in pharmacovigilance: computational cost as a neglected performance parameter. Int J Pharm Med 2007; 21 (5): 319-23
12. Caster O, Noren GK, Madigan D, et al. Large scale regressionbased pattern discovery: the example of screening the WHO global drug safety data base. Stat Anal Data Min 2010; 3 (4): 197-208
13. Pariente A, Gregoire F, Fourrier-Reglat A, et al. Impact of safety alerts on measures of disproportionality in spontaneous reporting databases: the notoriety bias. Drug Saf 2007; 30 (10): 891-8
14. Hauben M, Reich L, DeMicco J, et al. 'Extreme duplication' in the US FDA Adverse Events Reporting System Database. Drug Saf 2007; 30 (6): 551-4
15. Arimone Y, Miremont-Salame G, Haramburu F, et al. Interexpert agreement of seven criteria in causality assessment of adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2007 Oct; 64 (4): 482-8
16. Howalzi M, Delafosse C. Omeprazole-induced intractable cough. Ann Pharmacother 2003; 37: 1607-9