Taylor Lockwood G, Kürzinger Marie-Laure, Hermans Ruben, Enshaeifar Shirin, Dwan Bernadette, Chhikara Priyanka, Li Xinyu, Thummisetti Sreenivas, Colas Sandrine, Duverne Marielle, Juhaeri Juhaeri
IQVIA, Real World Solutions, Durham, NC, USA.
Sanofi, Epidemiology and Benefit-Risk, PSPV, Chilly-Mazarin, France.
Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2024 Aug 23:1-11. doi: 10.1080/14740338.2024.2393274.
Hypothesis-free signal detection (HFSD) methods such as tree-based scan statistics (TBSS) applied to longitudinal electronic healthcare data (EHD) are increasingly used in safety monitoring. However, challenges may arise in interpreting HFSD results alongside results from disproportionality analysis of spontaneous reporting.
Using the anti-diabetes drug insulin glargine (Lantus®) we apply two different tree-based scan designs using TreeScan™ software on retrospective EHD and compare the results to one another as well as to results from a disproportionality analysis using SRD.
The self-controlled tree temporal scan method produced the larger number of alerts relative to propensity-score matched approach; however, far fewer alerts were observed when analyses were limited to EHD in inpatient/emergency room settings only. Very few reference adverse events were observed using TBSS methods on EHD relative to disproportionality methods in SRD.
Differences in detected alerts between TBSS methods and between TBSS and disproportionality analysis of SRD are likely attributable to differences in data, comparator, and study design. Our results suggest that HFDS methods like TBSS applied to EHD may complement more traditional approaches such as disproportionality analysis of SRD to provide a more complete picture of product safety in the post-approval setting.
无假设信号检测(HFSD)方法,如应用于纵向电子医疗数据(EHD)的基于树的扫描统计(TBSS),在安全性监测中越来越常用。然而,在将HFSD结果与自发报告的不成比例分析结果一起解读时可能会出现挑战。
使用抗糖尿病药物甘精胰岛素(来得时®),我们在回顾性EHD上使用TreeScan™软件应用两种不同的基于树的扫描设计,并将结果相互比较,同时与使用SRD进行的不成比例分析结果进行比较。
与倾向得分匹配方法相比,自控树时间扫描方法产生的警报数量更多;然而,当分析仅限于住院/急诊室环境中的EHD时,观察到的警报要少得多。与SRD中的不成比例方法相比,在EHD上使用TBSS方法观察到的参考不良事件很少。
TBSS方法之间以及TBSS与SRD的不成比例分析之间检测到的警报差异可能归因于数据、比较器和研究设计的差异。我们的结果表明,应用于EHD的如TBSS的HFDS方法可能补充更传统的方法,如SRD的不成比例分析,以在批准后环境中提供更完整的产品安全性情况。