Investigating Overlap in Signals from EVDAS, FAERS, and VigiBase®

Ulrich Vogel (), John Stekelenborg, Brian Dreyfus, Anju Garg, Marian Habib, Romana Hosain and Antoni Wisniewski
Additional contact information
Ulrich Vogel: Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH
John Stekelenborg: Janssen, The Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson
Brian Dreyfus: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
Anju Garg: Global Pharmacovigilance, Sanofi
Marian Habib: Global Patient Safety and Epidemiology, Allergan
Romana Hosain: Regeneron
Antoni Wisniewski: Chief Medical Officer Organisation, AstraZeneca

Drug Safety, 2020, vol. 43, issue 4, No 6, 362 pages

Abstract: Abstract Introduction The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and VigiBase® are two established databases for safety monitoring of medicinal products, recently complemented with the EudraVigilance Data Analysis System (EVDAS). Objective Signals of disproportionate reporting (SDRs) can characterize the reporting profile of a drug, accounting for the distribution of all drugs and all events in the database. This study aims to quantify the redundancy among the three databases when characterized by two disproportionality-based analyses (DPA). Methods SDRs for 100 selected products were identified with two sets of thresholds (standard EudraVigilance SDR criteria for all vs Bayesian approach for FAERS and VigiBase®). Per product and database, the presence or absence of SDRs was determined and compared. Adverse events were considered at three levels: MedDRA® Preferred Term (PT), High Level Term (HLT), and HLT combined with Standardized MedDRA® Query (SMQ). Redundancy was measured in terms of recall (SDRs in EVDAS divided by SDRs from any database) and overlap (SDRs in EVDAS and at least one other database, divided by SDRs in EVDAS). Covariates with potential impact on results were explored with linear regression models. Results The median overlap between EVDAS and FAERS or VigiBase® was 85.0% at the PT level, 94.5% at the HLT level, and 97.7% at the HLT or SMQ level. The corresponding median recall of signals in EVDAS as a percentage of all signals generated in all three databases was 59.4%, 74.1%, and 87.9% at the PT, HLT, and HLT or SMQ levels, respectively. The overlap difference is partially explained by the relative number of EU cases in EudraVigilance and the ratio of EVDAS cases and FAERS cases, presumably due to differences in marketing authorizations, or market penetration in different regions. Products with few cases in EVDAS (

Date: 2020
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-019-00899-y Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s40264-019-00899-y

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/adis/journal/40264

DOI: 10.1007/s40264-019-00899-y

Access Statistics for this article

Drug Safety is currently edited by Nitin Joshi

More articles in Drug Safety from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().