Performance of subgrouped proportional reporting ratios in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) adverse event reporting system

References

• Hopstadius J, Norén GN, Bate A, et al. Impact of stratification on adverse drug reaction surveillance. Drug Saf. 2008;31(11):1035–1048.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopstadius J, Norén GN. Robust discovery of local patterns: subsets and stratification in adverse drug reaction surveillance. Proc 2nd ACM SIGHIT Int Health Inform Symp [Internet]. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2012 [cited 2021 Sep 26]. p. 265–274. Available from: 10.1145/2110363.2110395.
   Google Scholar
• Gordis L. Epidemiology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Evans SJW, Waller PC, Davis S. Use of proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for signal generation from spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2001;10(6):483–486.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wisniewski AFZ, Bate A, Bousquet C, et al. Good signal detection practices: evidence from IMI PROTECT. Drug Saf. 2016;39(6):469–490.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grundmark B, Holmberg L, Garmo H, et al. Reducing the noise in signal detection of adverse drug reactions by standardizing the background: a pilot study on analyses of proportional reporting ratios-by-therapeutic area. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;70(5):627–635.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clothier HJ, Lawrie J, Russell MA, et al. Early signal detection of adverse events following influenza vaccination using proportional reporting ratio, Victoria, Australia. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(11):e0224702.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seabroke S, Candore G, Juhlin K, et al. Performance of stratified and subgrouped disproportionality analyses in spontaneous databases. Drug Saf. 2016;39(4):355–364.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandberg L, Taavola H, Aoki Y, et al. Risk factor considerations in statistical signal detection: using subgroup disproportionality to uncover risk groups for adverse drug reactions in vigibase. Drug Saf. 2020;43(10):999–1009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonawane KB, Cheng N, Hansen RA. Serious adverse drug events reported to the FDA: analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system 2006-2014 database. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2018;24(7):682–690.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harinstein L, Kalra D, Kortepeter CM, et al. Evaluation of postmarketing reports from industry-sponsored programs in drug safety surveillance. Drug Saf. 2019;42(5):649–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scholl JHG, van Hunsel FPAM, Hak E, et al. A prediction model-based algorithm for computer-assisted database screening of adverse drug reactions in the Netherlands. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2018;27:199–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ietswaart R, Arat S, Chen AX, et al. Machine learning guided association of adverse drug reactions with in vitro target-based pharmacology. EBioMedicine. 2020;57:102837.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rolfes L, van V, Wilkes S, et al. Adverse drug reaction reports of patients and healthcare professionals—differences in reported information. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015;24(2):152–158.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) quarterly data extract ASC NTS file. 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Dauner DG, Farley JF. Comparing the use of individual and composite terms to evaluate adverse drug event disproportionality: a focus on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and diabetic retinopathy. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2021;20(4):475–480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• eCFR:: Title 21 [Internet]. Part 314 - Appl. FDA approv. Mark. New Drug. [ cited 2021 Feb 6]. Available from: https://ecfr.federalregister.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-314.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. January - March 2019 | Potential signals of serious risks/new safety information identified from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) [Internet]. FDA. 2020 [cited 2021 Feb 8]. p. 1. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/questions-and-answers-fdas-adverse-event-reporting-system-faers/january-march-2019-potential-signals-serious-risksnew-safety-information-identified-fda-adverse.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. April - June 2019 | Potential signals of serious risks/new safety information identified by the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) [Internet]. FDA. 2019 [cited 2021 Feb 8]. p. 2–5. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/questions-and-answers-fdas-adverse-event-reporting-system-faers/april-june-2019-potential-signals-serious-risksnew-safety-information-identified-fda-adverse-event.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA warns about rare occurrence of serious liver injury with use of hepatitis C medicines Mavyret, Zepatier, and Vosevi in some patients with advanced liver disease [Internet]. FDA Drug Saf. Commun. 2019. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-warns-about-rare-occurrence-serious-liver-injury-use-hepatitis-c-medicines-mavyret-zepatier-and.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan PB, Schuemie MJ, Welebob E, et al. Defining a reference set to support methodological research in drug safety. Drug Saf. 2013;36(S1):S33–S47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caster O, Juhlin K, Watson S, et al. Improved statistical signal detection in pharmacovigilance by combining multiple strength-of-evidence aspects in vigiRank: retrospective evaluation against emerging safety signals. Drug Saf. 2014;37(8):617–628.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manual for Pharmacy Technicians [Internet]. Man. pharm. Tech. ASHP; 2019 [cited 2021 Sep 9]. Available from: https://publications.ashp.org/view/book/9781585285020/9781585285020.xml.
   Google Scholar
• Harpaz R, Dumouchel W, Lependu P, et al. Performance of pharmacovigilance signal-detection algorithms for the FDA adverse event reporting system. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013;93(6):539–546.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harpaz R, DuMouchel W, LePendu P, et al. Empirical Bayes model to combine signals of adverse drug reactions. KDD. 2013;13:1339–1347.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn M, Campillos M, Letunic I, et al. A side effect resource to capture phenotypic effects of drugs. Mol Syst Biol. 2010;6(1):1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn M, Letunic I, Jensen LJ, et al. The SIDER database of drugs and side effects. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(D1):D1075–1079.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trevethan R. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Front Public Health. 2017;5:7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143(1):29–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caetano SJ, Sonpavde G, Pond GR. C-statistic: a brief explanation of its construction, interpretation and limitations. Eur J Cancer. 2018;90:130–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Medicines Agency. Heads of medicines agencies. Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP) - Module IX Addendum I – Methodological aspects of signal detection from spontaneous reports of suspected adverse reactions. 2017. p. 10.
   Google Scholar
• Waller P, Harrison-Woolrych M. An introduction to pharmacovigilance. Second ed. Chichester, West Sussex, UK ; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Wooten JM. Adverse drug reactions: part II. South Med J. 2010;103(11):1138–1147.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alatawi Y, Hansen R. Empirical estimation of under-reporting in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) - pubmed. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2017;16(7):761–767.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar