Cargando…

Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets

BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of adverse drug events (ADEs) is an important means of controlling and reducing drug-related morbidity and mortality. Since no single “gold standard” ADE data set exists, a range of different drug safety data sets are currently used for developing ADE prediction model...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cami, Aurel, Reis, Ben Y
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4150549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25149292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-74
_version_ 1782332919266672640
author Cami, Aurel
Reis, Ben Y
author_facet Cami, Aurel
Reis, Ben Y
author_sort Cami, Aurel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of adverse drug events (ADEs) is an important means of controlling and reducing drug-related morbidity and mortality. Since no single “gold standard” ADE data set exists, a range of different drug safety data sets are currently used for developing ADE prediction models. There is a critical need to assess the degree of concordance between these various ADE data sets and to validate ADE prediction models against multiple reference standards. METHODS: We systematically evaluated the concordance of two widely used ADE data sets – Lexi-comp from 2010 and SIDER from 2012. The strength of the association between ADE (drug) counts in Lexi-comp and SIDER was assessed using Spearman rank correlation, while the differences between the two data sets were characterized in terms of drug categories, ADE categories and ADE frequencies. We also performed a comparative validation of the Predictive Pharmacosafety Networks (PPN) model using both ADE data sets. The predictive power of PPN using each of the two validation sets was assessed using the area under Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: The correlations between the counts of ADEs and drugs in the two data sets were 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.91-0.93), respectively. Relative to an earlier snapshot of Lexi-comp from 2005, Lexi-comp 2010 and SIDER 2012 introduced a mean of 1,973 and 4,810 new drug-ADE associations per year, respectively. The difference between these two data sets was most pronounced for Nervous System and Anti-infective drugs, Gastrointestinal and Nervous System ADEs, and postmarketing ADEs. A minor difference of 1.1% was found in the AUROC of PPN when SIDER 2012 was used for validation instead of Lexi-comp 2010. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the ADE and drug counts in Lexi-comp and SIDER data sets were highly correlated and the choice of validation set did not greatly affect the overall prediction performance of PPN. Our results also suggest that it is important to be aware of the differences that exist among ADE data sets, especially in modeling applications focused on specific drug and ADE categories.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4150549
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41505492014-09-02 Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets Cami, Aurel Reis, Ben Y BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of adverse drug events (ADEs) is an important means of controlling and reducing drug-related morbidity and mortality. Since no single “gold standard” ADE data set exists, a range of different drug safety data sets are currently used for developing ADE prediction models. There is a critical need to assess the degree of concordance between these various ADE data sets and to validate ADE prediction models against multiple reference standards. METHODS: We systematically evaluated the concordance of two widely used ADE data sets – Lexi-comp from 2010 and SIDER from 2012. The strength of the association between ADE (drug) counts in Lexi-comp and SIDER was assessed using Spearman rank correlation, while the differences between the two data sets were characterized in terms of drug categories, ADE categories and ADE frequencies. We also performed a comparative validation of the Predictive Pharmacosafety Networks (PPN) model using both ADE data sets. The predictive power of PPN using each of the two validation sets was assessed using the area under Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: The correlations between the counts of ADEs and drugs in the two data sets were 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.86) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.91-0.93), respectively. Relative to an earlier snapshot of Lexi-comp from 2005, Lexi-comp 2010 and SIDER 2012 introduced a mean of 1,973 and 4,810 new drug-ADE associations per year, respectively. The difference between these two data sets was most pronounced for Nervous System and Anti-infective drugs, Gastrointestinal and Nervous System ADEs, and postmarketing ADEs. A minor difference of 1.1% was found in the AUROC of PPN when SIDER 2012 was used for validation instead of Lexi-comp 2010. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the ADE and drug counts in Lexi-comp and SIDER data sets were highly correlated and the choice of validation set did not greatly affect the overall prediction performance of PPN. Our results also suggest that it is important to be aware of the differences that exist among ADE data sets, especially in modeling applications focused on specific drug and ADE categories. BioMed Central 2014-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4150549/ /pubmed/25149292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-74 Text en Copyright © 2014 Cami and Reis; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cami, Aurel
Reis, Ben Y
Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets
title Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets
title_full Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets
title_fullStr Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets
title_full_unstemmed Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets
title_short Concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets
title_sort concordance and predictive value of two adverse drug event data sets
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4150549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25149292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-74
work_keys_str_mv AT camiaurel concordanceandpredictivevalueoftwoadversedrugeventdatasets
AT reisbeny concordanceandpredictivevalueoftwoadversedrugeventdatasets