Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24177320›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2014

Automatic signal extraction, prioritizing and filtering approaches in detecting post-marketing cardiovascular events associated with targeted cancer drugs from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

Rong Xu, Quanqiu Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Detecting Signals of Dietary Supplement Adverse Events from the CFSAN Adverse Event Reporting System (CAERS).AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Disease comorbidity-guided drug repositioning: a case study in schizophrenia.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2018
    Article
  20. Drug repositioning for prostate cancer: using a data-driven approach to gain new insights.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rong XuMedical Informatics Program, Center for Clinical Investigation, Case Western Reserve University, United States. Electronic address: rxx@case.edu.
Quanqiu WangThinTek, LLC, Palo Alto, CA, United States.
Case Western Reserve University · US

Funding

CTSA INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PEDIATRIC RESEARCHUL1RR024989 · NCRR · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI DAVIS, PAMELA B · 2007 to 2011
$53.7M
Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative of ClevelandUL1TR000439 · NCATS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI KONSTAN, MICHAEL W. · 2012 to 2016
$50.0M
Rapid reverse translational drug repositioningDP2HD084068 · NICHD · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI XU, RONG · 2014 to 2014
$2.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000439NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024989NICHD NIH HHS DP2 HD084068
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTargeted drugs dramatically improve the treatment outcomes in cancer patients; however, these innovative drugs are often associated with unexpectedly high cardiovascular toxicity. Currently, cardiovascular safety represents both a challenging issue for drug developers, regulators, researchers, and clinicians and a concern for patients. While FDA drug labels have captured many of these events, spontaneous reporting systems are a main source for post-marketing drug safety surveillance in 'real-world' (outside of clinical trials) cancer patients. In this study, we present approaches to extracting, prioritizing, filtering, and confirming cardiovascular events associated with targeted cancer drugs from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). DATA AND

methodsThe dataset includes records of 4,285,097 patients from FAERS. We first extracted drug-cardiovascular event (drug-CV) pairs from FAERS through named entity recognition and mapping processes. We then compared six ranking algorithms in prioritizing true positive signals among extracted pairs using known drug-CV pairs derived from FDA drug labels. We also developed three filtering algorithms to further improve precision. Finally, we manually validated extracted drug-CV pairs using 21 million published MEDLINE records.

resultsWe extracted a total of 11,173 drug-CV pairs from FAERS. We showed that ranking by frequency is significantly more effective than by the five standard signal detection methods (246% improvement in precision for top-ranked pairs). The filtering algorithm we developed further improved overall precision by 91.3%. By manual curation using literature evidence, we show that about 51.9% of the 617 drug-CV pairs that appeared in both FAERS and MEDLINE sentences are true positives. In addition, 80.6% of these positive pairs have not been captured by FDA drug labeling.

conclusionsThe unique drug-CV association dataset that we created based on FAERS could facilitate our understanding and prediction of cardiotoxic events associated with targeted cancer drugs.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsAlgorithmsAntineoplastic AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesDatabases, FactualData MiningElectronic Data ProcessingHumansNeoplasmsUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAntineoplastic AgentsCardiotoxicityData miningPersonalized medicinePost-market drug safety surveillanceTargeted cancer therapy

Identifiers

PMID24177320
PMCPMC4452013
OpenAlexW2078705463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.