ArticleDrug safety2007
Potential use of data-mining algorithms for the detection of 'surprise' adverse drug reactions.
Article in Drug safety, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Real-world pharmacovigilance of drug-related bone metabolism disorders: integrating FAERS and VigiAccess with a Bradford Hill-based causal plausibility assessment.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Prescribed Drugs and Interpersonal Violence: A Case-Non-Case Study in the Spanish Pharmacovigilance Database.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prescribed Drugs and Self-Directed Violence: A Descriptive Study in the Spanish Pharmacovigilance Database.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Performance of Stratified and Subgrouped Disproportionality Analyses in Spontaneous Databases.Drug safety · 2016Article
- Comparison of statistical signal detection methods within and across spontaneous reporting databases.Drug safety · 2015Article
- Life-threatening dermatologic adverse events in oncology.Anti-cancer drugs · 2014Article
- Trends in reporting methadone-associated cardiac arrhythmia, 1997-2011: an analysis of registry data.Annals of internal medicine · 2013Article
- Postmarketing safety surveillance : where does signal detection using electronic healthcare records fit into the big picture?Drug safety · 2013Review
- A CTD-Pfizer collaboration: manual curation of 88,000 scientific articles text mined for drug-disease and drug-phenotype interactions.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2013Article
- Pharmacovigilance analysis of adverse event reports for aliskiren hemifumarate, a first-in-class direct renin inhibitor.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2011Article
- Prospective data mining of six products in the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System: disposition of events identified and impact on product safety profiles.Drug safety · 2010Article
- Exposure to antibacterial agents with QT liability in 14 European countries: trends over an 8-year period.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2009Review
- Venous thromboembolism in myelodysplastic syndrome patients receiving lenalidomide: results from postmarketing surveillance and data mining techniques.Clinical drug investigation · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveVarious data mining algorithms (DMAs) that perform disporportionality analysis on spontaneous reporting system (SRS) data are being heavily promoted to improve drug safety surveillance. The incremental value of DMAs is ultimately related to their ability to detect truly unexpected associations that would have escaped traditional surveillance and/or their ability to identify the same associations as traditional methods but with greater scientific efficiency. As to the former potential benefit, in the course of evaluating DMAs, we have observed what we call 'surprise reactions'. These adverse reactions may be discounted in manual review of adverse drug reaction (ADR) lists because they are less clinically dramatic, less characteristic of drug effects in general, less serious than the classical type B hypersensitivity reactions or may have subtle pharmacological explanations. Thus these reactions may only become recognised when post hoc explanations are sought based on more refined pharmacological knowledge of the formulation. The objective of this study was to explore notions of 'unexpectedness' as relates to signal detection and data mining by introducing the concept of 'surprise reactions' and to determine if the latter associations, often first reported in the literature, represent a type of ADR amenable to detection with the assistance of adjunctive statistical calculations on SRS data.
methodsUsing commonly cited thresholds, the multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS) and proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) were applied to reports in the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) database of well documented 'surprise reactions' compiled by the authors.
resultsThere were 34 relevant surprise reactions involving 29 separate drugs in 17 different drug classes. Using PRRs (PRR >2, chi(2) >4, N >2), 12 drug-event combinations were signalled before the first ADR citation appeared in MEDLINE, four occurred concurrently and 11 after. With empirical Bayes geometric mean (EBGM) analysis (EBGM >2, N >0), 12 signals occurred before, three concurrently and 11 after publication of the first literature citation. With EB(05) (EB(05)> or =2, N >0), six occurred before, two concurrently and 14 after MEDLINE citation. DISCUSSION: Pharmacovigilance is rather unique in terms of the number and variety of events under surveillance. Some events may be more appropriate targets for statistical approaches than others. The experience of many organisations is that most statistical disproportionalities represent known associations but our findings suggest there could be events that may be discounted on manual review of adverse event lists, which may be usefully highlighted via DMAs.
conclusionsIdentification of surprise reactions may serve as an important niche for DMAs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17253879What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.