IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v42y2019i6d10.1007_s40264-018-00792-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison Study of Algorithms to Detect Drug–Adverse Event Associations: Frequentist, Bayesian, and Machine-Learning Approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Minh Pham

    (University of South Florida)

  • Feng Cheng

    (University of South Florida)

  • Kandethody Ramachandran

    (University of South Florida)

Abstract

Introduction It is important to monitor the safety profile of drugs, and mining for strong associations between drugs and adverse events is an effective and inexpensive method of post-marketing safety surveillance. Objective The objective of our work was to compare the accuracy of both common and innovative methods of data mining for pharmacovigilance purposes. Methods We used the reference standard provided by the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership, which contains 398 drug–adverse event pairs (165 positive controls, 233 negative controls). Ten methods and algorithms were applied to the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System data to investigate the 398 pairs. The ten methods include popular methods in the pharmacovigilance literature, newly developed pharmacovigilance methods as at 2018, and popular methods in the genome-wide association study literature. We compared their performance using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) plot, area under the curve (AUC), and Youden’s index. Results The Bayesian confidence propagation neural network had the highest AUC overall. Monte Carlo expectation maximization, a method developed in 2018, had the second highest AUC and the highest Youden’s index, and performed very well in terms of high specificity. The regression-adjusted gamma Poisson shrinkage model performed best under high-sensitivity requirements. Conclusion Our results will be useful to help choose a method for a given desired level of specificity. Methods popular in the genome-wide association study literature did not perform well because of the sparsity of data and will need modification before their properties can be used in the drug–adverse event association problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Minh Pham & Feng Cheng & Kandethody Ramachandran, 2019. "A Comparison Study of Algorithms to Detect Drug–Adverse Event Associations: Frequentist, Bayesian, and Machine-Learning Approaches," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 743-750, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:42:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s40264-018-00792-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-018-00792-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-018-00792-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-018-00792-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:42:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s40264-018-00792-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.