Aggregation of Adverse Event Terms for Signal Detection and Labeling in Clinical Trials.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Richard C Zink, Rebecca Lyzinski, Geoffrey Mann
{"title":"Aggregation of Adverse Event Terms for Signal Detection and Labeling in Clinical Trials.","authors":"Richard C Zink, Rebecca Lyzinski, Geoffrey Mann","doi":"10.1007/s40264-025-01518-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) was developed in the mid-to-late 1990s to address the shortcomings of other medical dictionaries used for coding adverse events. Since that time, MedDRA has become the required coding dictionary for major regulatory authorities involved with the International Council for Harmonisation. Due to the increased specificity and significant increase in terminology over time, several approaches have been developed to aggregate terms for the purposes of signal detection and labeling. We present the approaches taken and suggested to date to aggregate preferred terms into meaningful medical concepts. We discuss the pros and cons of different methods in which to group terms, and illustrate that analyses performed for MedDRA preferred terms can also be conducted using aggregated terms. However, some features of adverse events available at the preferred term level, such as severity and relationship to study therapy, require additional consideration for analysis. In the last 25 years, the pendulum for medical coding is swinging in the other direction. Faced with a deluge of preferred terms, users of MedDRA are developing new ways in which to collapse terms into medical concepts. The ability to identify safety concerns and communicate important data in drug labels effectively and consistently are at risk, particularly with the introduction of new aggregations.</p>","PeriodicalId":11382,"journal":{"name":"Drug Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-025-01518-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) was developed in the mid-to-late 1990s to address the shortcomings of other medical dictionaries used for coding adverse events. Since that time, MedDRA has become the required coding dictionary for major regulatory authorities involved with the International Council for Harmonisation. Due to the increased specificity and significant increase in terminology over time, several approaches have been developed to aggregate terms for the purposes of signal detection and labeling. We present the approaches taken and suggested to date to aggregate preferred terms into meaningful medical concepts. We discuss the pros and cons of different methods in which to group terms, and illustrate that analyses performed for MedDRA preferred terms can also be conducted using aggregated terms. However, some features of adverse events available at the preferred term level, such as severity and relationship to study therapy, require additional consideration for analysis. In the last 25 years, the pendulum for medical coding is swinging in the other direction. Faced with a deluge of preferred terms, users of MedDRA are developing new ways in which to collapse terms into medical concepts. The ability to identify safety concerns and communicate important data in drug labels effectively and consistently are at risk, particularly with the introduction of new aggregations.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Drug Safety
Drug Safety 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
112
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Drug Safety is the official journal of the International Society of Pharmacovigilance. The journal includes: Overviews of contentious or emerging issues. Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on epidemiology, clinical features, prevention and management of adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes. In-depth benefit-risk assessment of adverse effect and efficacy data for a drug in a defined therapeutic area. Systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement. Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies in disciplines such as pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilance, pharmacology and toxicology, and pharmacogenomics. Editorials and commentaries on topical issues. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Drug Safety Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信