对自发报告系统得出的比例失调情况进行分析和解释

P. Cutroneo, Daniele Sartori, Marco Tuccori, Salvatore Crisafulli, V. Battini, Carla Carnovale, C. Rafaniello, Annalisa Capuano, E. Poluzzi, Ugo Moretti, E. Raschi
{"title":"对自发报告系统得出的比例失调情况进行分析和解释","authors":"P. Cutroneo, Daniele Sartori, Marco Tuccori, Salvatore Crisafulli, V. Battini, Carla Carnovale, C. Rafaniello, Annalisa Capuano, E. Poluzzi, Ugo Moretti, E. Raschi","doi":"10.3389/fdsfr.2023.1323057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Spontaneous reporting systems remain pivotal for post-marketing surveillance and disproportionality analysis (DA) represents a recognized approach for early signal detection. Although DAs cannot be used per se as a standalone approach to assess a drug-related risk and cannot replace clinical judgment in the individual patient, their role remain irreplaceable for rapid detection of rare and unpredictable adverse drug reactions with strong drug-attributable component (e.g., designated medical events), especially when developed by a multidisciplinary team and combined with a careful case-by-case analysis (individual inspection of reports for causality assessment or to uncover reporting patterns and clinical features). In the recent past, a remarkable increase in publications of pharmacovigilance studies using DAs was observed, albeit the quality was debated: several publications contained “spin”, namely, misinterpretation of results to infer causality, calculate incidence, or provide risk stratification, which may ultimately result in unjustified alarm. The development of dedicated Guidelines by the international READUS-PV project (https://readus-statement.org/) will allow reproducible and transparent publication of accurate DAs, thus supporting their real transferability and exploitation by regulators and clinicians. This review offered a perspective on methodological aspects (and understanding) of DAs, their rationale, design, reporting, and interpretation.","PeriodicalId":489826,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in drug safety and regulation","volume":"53 43","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conducting and interpreting disproportionality analyses derived from spontaneous reporting systems\",\"authors\":\"P. Cutroneo, Daniele Sartori, Marco Tuccori, Salvatore Crisafulli, V. Battini, Carla Carnovale, C. Rafaniello, Annalisa Capuano, E. Poluzzi, Ugo Moretti, E. Raschi\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fdsfr.2023.1323057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Spontaneous reporting systems remain pivotal for post-marketing surveillance and disproportionality analysis (DA) represents a recognized approach for early signal detection. Although DAs cannot be used per se as a standalone approach to assess a drug-related risk and cannot replace clinical judgment in the individual patient, their role remain irreplaceable for rapid detection of rare and unpredictable adverse drug reactions with strong drug-attributable component (e.g., designated medical events), especially when developed by a multidisciplinary team and combined with a careful case-by-case analysis (individual inspection of reports for causality assessment or to uncover reporting patterns and clinical features). In the recent past, a remarkable increase in publications of pharmacovigilance studies using DAs was observed, albeit the quality was debated: several publications contained “spin”, namely, misinterpretation of results to infer causality, calculate incidence, or provide risk stratification, which may ultimately result in unjustified alarm. The development of dedicated Guidelines by the international READUS-PV project (https://readus-statement.org/) will allow reproducible and transparent publication of accurate DAs, thus supporting their real transferability and exploitation by regulators and clinicians. This review offered a perspective on methodological aspects (and understanding) of DAs, their rationale, design, reporting, and interpretation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":489826,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in drug safety and regulation\",\"volume\":\"53 43\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in drug safety and regulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdsfr.2023.1323057\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in drug safety and regulation","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdsfr.2023.1323057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自发报告系统仍然是上市后监测的关键,而比例失调分析(DA)则是公认的早期信号检测方法。尽管不相称性分析本身不能作为评估药物相关风险的独立方法,也不能取代对个体患者的临床判断,但其在快速发现罕见和不可预测的、具有强烈药物归因成分的药物不良反应(如指定医疗事件)方面的作用仍然是不可替代的,尤其是在由多学科团队开发并与仔细的个案分析(对报告进行个别检查以评估因果关系或发现报告模式和临床特征)相结合的情况下。近来,使用数据采集系统进行药物警戒研究的出版物显著增加,但其质量却存在争议:一些出版物含有 "自旋 "成分,即对结果进行曲解,以推断因果关系、计算发病率或提供风险分层,最终可能导致不合理的警报。国际 READUS-PV 项目(https://readus-statement.org/)制定了专门的《指南》,这将允许以可重复和透明的方式发表准确的数据,从而支持其真正的可转让性,并为监管机构和临床医生所利用。本综述从方法学的角度(和理解)阐述了DAs、其原理、设计、报告和解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conducting and interpreting disproportionality analyses derived from spontaneous reporting systems
Spontaneous reporting systems remain pivotal for post-marketing surveillance and disproportionality analysis (DA) represents a recognized approach for early signal detection. Although DAs cannot be used per se as a standalone approach to assess a drug-related risk and cannot replace clinical judgment in the individual patient, their role remain irreplaceable for rapid detection of rare and unpredictable adverse drug reactions with strong drug-attributable component (e.g., designated medical events), especially when developed by a multidisciplinary team and combined with a careful case-by-case analysis (individual inspection of reports for causality assessment or to uncover reporting patterns and clinical features). In the recent past, a remarkable increase in publications of pharmacovigilance studies using DAs was observed, albeit the quality was debated: several publications contained “spin”, namely, misinterpretation of results to infer causality, calculate incidence, or provide risk stratification, which may ultimately result in unjustified alarm. The development of dedicated Guidelines by the international READUS-PV project (https://readus-statement.org/) will allow reproducible and transparent publication of accurate DAs, thus supporting their real transferability and exploitation by regulators and clinicians. This review offered a perspective on methodological aspects (and understanding) of DAs, their rationale, design, reporting, and interpretation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信