Finding Needles in the Haystack: Clinical Utility Score for Prioritisation (CUSP), an Automated Approach for Identifying Spontaneous Reports with the Highest Clinical Utility

Vijay Kara (), Greg Powell, Olivia Mahaux, Aparna Jayachandra, Naashika Nyako, Christopher Golds and Andrew Bate
Additional contact information
Vijay Kara: GSK
Greg Powell: GSK
Olivia Mahaux: GSK
Aparna Jayachandra: GSK
Naashika Nyako: GSK
Christopher Golds: GSK
Andrew Bate: GSK

Drug Safety, 2023, vol. 46, issue 9, No 3, 847-855

Abstract: Abstract Introduction Spontaneous reporting of adverse events has increased steadily over the past decades, and although this trend has contributed to improving post-marketing surveillance pharmacovigilance activities, the consequent amount of data generated is challenging to manually review during assessment, with each individual report requiring review by pharmacovigilance experts. This highlights a clear need for alternative or complementary methodologies to help prioritise review. Objective Here, we aimed to develop and test an automated methodology, the Clinical Utility Score for Prioritisation (CUSP), to assist pharmacovigilance experts in prioritising clinical assessment of safety data to improve the rapidity of case series review when case volumes are large. Methods The CUSP method was tested on a reference dataset of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) associated to five drug-event pairs that led to labelling changes. The selected drug-event pairs were of varying characteristics across the portfolio of GSK’s products. Results The mean CUSP score for ‘key cases’ and ‘cases of low utility’ was 19.7 (median: 21; range: 7–27) and 17.3 (median: 19; range: 4–27), respectively. CUSP distribution for ‘key cases’ were skewed toward the higher range of scores compared with ‘all cases’. The overall performance across each individual drug-event pair varied considerably, showing higher predictive power for ‘key cases’ for three of the drug-event pairs (average CUSP between these three: 22.8; range: 22.5–23.0) and lesser power for the remaining two (average CUSP between these two: 17.6; range: 14.5–20.7). Conclusion Although several tools have been developed to assess ICSR completeness and regulatory utility, this is the first attempt to successfully develop an automated clinical utility scoring system that can support the prioritisation of ICSRs for clinical review.

Date: 2023
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-023-01327-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:46:y:2023:i:9:d:10.1007_s40264-023-01327-y

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

DOI: 10.1007/s40264-023-01327-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 ().