药物警戒中主动比较器设计的掩蔽:对噻唑烷二酮类药物和心血管事件自发报告的回顾性偏倚分析。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
William Bai, Antonios Douros, Christopher A Gravel
{"title":"药物警戒中主动比较器设计的掩蔽:对噻唑烷二酮类药物和心血管事件自发报告的回顾性偏倚分析。","authors":"William Bai, Antonios Douros, Christopher A Gravel","doi":"10.1002/pds.70102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Masking is a reporting bias where drug safety signals are muffled by elevated reporting of other medications in spontaneous reporting databases. While the impact of masking is often limited, its effect when using restricted designs, such as active comparators, can be consequential.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the US Food and Drugs Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (1999Q3-2013Q3) to study masking in a real-world example. Rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione with elevated reporting after safety concerns over cardiovascular risks, was the masking candidate. We hypothesized that stimulated reporting masked signals for another thiazolidinedione, pioglitazone. We computed estimates of proportional reporting ratios and information components, using the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network, for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction and pioglitazone-cardiac failure under unrestricted and active comparator designs, with and without the mask, before (1999Q3-2007Q1) and after (2007Q2-2013Q3) safety concerns. Relative change-in-estimates were computed to compare results with and without rosiglitazone.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 1999Q3-2007Q1, relative change-in-estimates of proportional reporting ratio for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.00 in unrestricted design and 0.10 in active comparator, and for pioglitazone-cardiac failure, the change was 0.01 and 0.62, respectively. From 2007Q2-2013Q3, relative change-in-estimates for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.41 in unrestricted design and 18.00 in active comparator; the change for pioglitazone-cardiac failure was 0.04 and 1.03, respectively. Relative changes in estimates of information component mirrored these trends.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Masking can influence signal detection in active comparator designs where external events impact reporting rates in reference sets. Evaluating masking in related contexts is essential for drug safety monitoring and resource allocation for follow-up studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 1","pages":"e70102"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Masking in Active Comparator Designs in Pharmacovigilance: A Retrospective Bias Analysis on the Spontaneous Reporting of Thiazolidinediones and Cardiovascular Events.\",\"authors\":\"William Bai, Antonios Douros, Christopher A Gravel\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.70102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Masking is a reporting bias where drug safety signals are muffled by elevated reporting of other medications in spontaneous reporting databases. While the impact of masking is often limited, its effect when using restricted designs, such as active comparators, can be consequential.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the US Food and Drugs Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (1999Q3-2013Q3) to study masking in a real-world example. Rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione with elevated reporting after safety concerns over cardiovascular risks, was the masking candidate. We hypothesized that stimulated reporting masked signals for another thiazolidinedione, pioglitazone. We computed estimates of proportional reporting ratios and information components, using the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network, for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction and pioglitazone-cardiac failure under unrestricted and active comparator designs, with and without the mask, before (1999Q3-2007Q1) and after (2007Q2-2013Q3) safety concerns. Relative change-in-estimates were computed to compare results with and without rosiglitazone.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 1999Q3-2007Q1, relative change-in-estimates of proportional reporting ratio for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.00 in unrestricted design and 0.10 in active comparator, and for pioglitazone-cardiac failure, the change was 0.01 and 0.62, respectively. From 2007Q2-2013Q3, relative change-in-estimates for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.41 in unrestricted design and 18.00 in active comparator; the change for pioglitazone-cardiac failure was 0.04 and 1.03, respectively. Relative changes in estimates of information component mirrored these trends.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Masking can influence signal detection in active comparator designs where external events impact reporting rates in reference sets. Evaluating masking in related contexts is essential for drug safety monitoring and resource allocation for follow-up studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"e70102\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70102\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70102","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:掩蔽是一种报告偏差,即在自发报告数据库中,药物安全性信号被其他药物的高水平报告所掩盖。虽然掩蔽的影响通常是有限的,但在使用限制性设计(如活性比较者)时,其影响可能会非常严重:我们利用美国食品药品管理局不良事件报告系统(1999Q3-2013Q3)中的数据,研究了一个真实案例中的掩蔽现象。罗格列酮是一种噻唑烷二酮类药物,因其心血管风险的安全性问题而导致报告率升高。我们假设,受刺激的报告掩盖了另一种噻唑烷二酮--吡格列酮的信号。我们利用贝叶斯置信度传播神经网络,计算了在无限制和积极的参照物设计下,在有和无掩蔽的情况下,安全问题之前(1999Q3-2007Q1)和之后(2007Q2-2013Q3),吡格列酮-心肌梗死和吡格列酮-心力衰竭的比例报告率和信息成分的估计值。计算了估计值的相对变化,以比较使用和不使用罗格列酮的结果:从1999Q3-2007Q1,在非限制性设计中,吡格列酮-心肌梗死的比例报告比的相对变化估计值为0.00,而在活性比较中为0.10;在吡格列酮-心力衰竭的比例报告比的相对变化估计值分别为0.01和0.62。2007Q2-2013Q3 期间,吡格列酮-心肌梗死估计值的相对变化在非限制性设计中为 0.41,在积极的参照研究中为 18.00;吡格列酮-心力衰竭估计值的相对变化分别为 0.04 和 1.03。信息成分估计值的相对变化反映了这些趋势:结论:在外部事件影响参照组报告率的主动比较设计中,掩蔽会影响信号检测。评估相关情况下的掩蔽对于药物安全性监测和后续研究的资源分配至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Masking in Active Comparator Designs in Pharmacovigilance: A Retrospective Bias Analysis on the Spontaneous Reporting of Thiazolidinediones and Cardiovascular Events.

Introduction: Masking is a reporting bias where drug safety signals are muffled by elevated reporting of other medications in spontaneous reporting databases. While the impact of masking is often limited, its effect when using restricted designs, such as active comparators, can be consequential.

Methods: We used data from the US Food and Drugs Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (1999Q3-2013Q3) to study masking in a real-world example. Rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione with elevated reporting after safety concerns over cardiovascular risks, was the masking candidate. We hypothesized that stimulated reporting masked signals for another thiazolidinedione, pioglitazone. We computed estimates of proportional reporting ratios and information components, using the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network, for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction and pioglitazone-cardiac failure under unrestricted and active comparator designs, with and without the mask, before (1999Q3-2007Q1) and after (2007Q2-2013Q3) safety concerns. Relative change-in-estimates were computed to compare results with and without rosiglitazone.

Results: From 1999Q3-2007Q1, relative change-in-estimates of proportional reporting ratio for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.00 in unrestricted design and 0.10 in active comparator, and for pioglitazone-cardiac failure, the change was 0.01 and 0.62, respectively. From 2007Q2-2013Q3, relative change-in-estimates for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.41 in unrestricted design and 18.00 in active comparator; the change for pioglitazone-cardiac failure was 0.04 and 1.03, respectively. Relative changes in estimates of information component mirrored these trends.

Conclusions: Masking can influence signal detection in active comparator designs where external events impact reporting rates in reference sets. Evaluating masking in related contexts is essential for drug safety monitoring and resource allocation for follow-up studies.

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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
×
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