Active Vaccine and Drug Surveillance

Towards a 100 Million Member System
Chapter

Abstract

After the withdrawal of rofecoxib (known by the trade name Vioxx) from the US pharmaceutical market in 2004, post-approval drug safety and surveillance came under serious scrutiny. In 2008 the FDA announced the Sentinel Initiative, which includes an active surveillance system based on 100 million people’s health-care data. In this chapter we describe a number of challenges involved in active drug and vaccine surveillance and provide an overview of state-of-the-art surveillance methodologies. We also address the statistical tradeo-ffs involved in surveillance, highlight some areas for future research, and frame the policy issues that designers of surveillance systems will have to address.

References

  1. 1.
    th US Congress (2007) Food and drug administration amendments act. http://www.premierinc.com/safety/topics/pediatrics/downloads/FDA-Peds-Med-Device-Act-Title-3-2007.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2011
  2. 2.
    Ball R, Horne D, Izurieta H, Sutherland A, Walderhaug M, Hsu H (2011) Statistical, epidemiological, and risk-assessment approaches to evaluating safety of vaccines throughout the life cycle at the food and drug administration. Pediatrics 127(Suppl 1):S31–S38Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Roy Stat Soc B Met 57(1):289–300Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berry SM, Berry DA (2004) Accounting for multiplicities in assessing drug safety: A three-level hierarchical mixture model. Biometrics 60(2):418–426Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bertsimas D, Bjarnadottir MV, Kane MA Real-time post-marketing drug surveillance. Working paperGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bertsimas D, Bjarnadottir MV, Kane MA, Kryder JC, Panday R, Vempala S, Wang G (2008) Algorithmic prediction of health-care costs. Oper Res 56:1382–1392Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bishop CE, Ryan AM, Gilden DM, Kubisiak J, Thomas CP (2009) Effect of an expenditure cap on low-income seniors drug use and spending in a state pharmacy assistance program. Health Serv Res 44:1010–1028Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bjarnadottir MV, Guan Y Follow the money: Real-time drug surveillance by monitoring costs in health care claims data. WorkingpaperGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bjarnadottir MV, Guan Y (2010) Statistical tradeoff in real-time post-marketing drug surveillance. In: Proceedings of the 5th informs workshop on data mining and health informatics, 2010Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bjarnadottir MV, Kane MA, Ghimire S Long-term effects of drugs: A case study of statins. Working paperGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bjarnadottir MV, Zenios S Analytics of drug surveillance systems. Working paperGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Black DM, Schwartz AV, Ensrud KE, Cauley JA, Levis S, Quandt SA, Satterfield S, Wallace RB, Bauer DC, Palermo L, Wehren LE, Lombardi A, Santora AC, Cummings SR, FLEX Research Group (2006) Effects of continuing or stopping alendronate after 5 years of treatment: The fracture intervention trial long-term extension (flex): A randomized trial. J Am Med Assoc 296(24):2927–2938Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Braun MM (2008) Toward better vaccine safety data and safer vaccination. Pediatrics 121(3):625–626Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brown JS, Kulldorff M, Chan KA, Davis RL, Graham D, Pettus PT, Andrade SE, Raebel MA, Herrinton L, Roblin D, Boudreau D, Smith D, Gurwitz JH, Gunter MJ, Platt R (2007) Early detection of adverse drug events within population-based health networks: Application of sequential testing methods. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 16(12):1275–1284Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brown JS, Kulldorff M, Petronis KR, Reynolds R, Chan KA, Davis RL, Graham D, Andrade SE, Raebel MA, Herrinton L, Roblin D, Boudreau D, Smith D, Gurwitz JH, Gunter MJ, Platt R (2009) Early adverse drug event signal detection within population-based health networks using sequential methods: Key methodologic considerations. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 18(3):226–234Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brown JS, Velentgas P, Kulldorff M, Moore KM, Duddy A, Platt R (2008) Using electronic health data for influenza vaccine safety: New methodologies and considerations. In: Implementation of rapic cycle analysis for detection of potential excess risk of adverse events following influenza vaccination: A policy maker’s guide. Web. Accessed 13 June 2011Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2012) Icd-10: 2012 icd-10-cm and gems. http://www.cms.gov/ICD10/11b14_2012_ICD10CM_and_GEMs.asp. Accessed 3 Jan 2012
  18. 18.
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2012) Icd-10: Overview. http://www.cms.gov/ICD10/. Accessed 3 Jan 2012
  19. 19.
    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2012) Icd-9 provider and diagnostic codes. http://www.cms.gov/ICD9ProviderDiagnosticCodes/. Accessed 3 Jan 2012
  20. 20.
    Chan KA, Truman A, Gurwitz JH, Hurley JS, Martinson B, Platt R, Everhart JE, Moseley RH, Terrault N, Ackerson L, Selby JV (2003) A cohort study of the incidence of serious acute liver injury in diabetic patients treated with hypoglycemic agents. Arch Intern Med 163(6):728–734Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    CNN (2005) Celebrex, bextra, vioxx can stay: Fda panel says the painkillers should stay on the market despite risks; vioxx draws a split vote. http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/18/news/fortune500/merck_drugs/. Accessed 12 June 2011
  22. 22.
    Czerwinski D (2008) Quality of care and drug surveillance: A data-driven perspective. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Daemen J, Boersma E, Flather M, Booth J, Stables R, Rodriguez A, Rodriguez-Granillo G, Hueb WA, Lemos PA, Serruys PW (2008) Long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis with 5-year patient-level data from the arts, eraci-ii, mass-ii, and sos trials. Circulation 118(11):1146–1154Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dragomir A, Ct R, Roy L, Blais L, Lalonde L, Brard A, Perreault S (2010) Impact of adherence to antihypertensive agents on clinical outcomes and hospitalization costs. Med Care 48:418–425Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Glassman AH, Bigger JT, Gaffney M (2009) Psychiatric characteristics associated with long-term mortality among 361 patients having an acute coronary syndrome and major depression: seven-year follow-up of sadhart participants. Arch Gen Psychiatry 66(9):1022–1029Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Graham DJ, Campen D, Hui R, Spence M, Cheetham C, Levy G, Shoor S, Ray WA (2005) Risk of acute myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death in patients treated with cyclo-oxygenase 2 selective and non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: Nested case-control study. The Lancet 365:475–481Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Graham DJ, Ouellet-Hellstrom R, MaCurdy TE, Ali F, Sholley C, Worrall C, Kelman JA (2010) Risk of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and death in elderly medicare patients treated with rosiglitazone or pioglitazone. J Am Med Assoc 304(4):411–418Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hazlehurst B, Naleway A, Mullooly J (2009) Detecting possible vaccine adverse events in clinical notes of the electronic medical record. Vaccine 27(14):2077–2083Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Health Canada (2005) Summary: Report of the expert advisory panel on the safety of cox-2 selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (nsaids). http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/alt_formats/hpfb-dgpsa/pdf/prodpharma/sap_summary_gcs_sommaire_cox2-eng.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2011
  30. 30.
    Hochberg Y (1988) A sharper bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 75:800–802Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hocine MN, Musonda P, Andrews NJ, Farrington CP (2009) Sequential case series analysis for pharmacovigilance. J Roy Stat Soc A (Sta) 172(1):213–236Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jackevicius CA, Mamdani M, Tu JV (2002) Adherence with statin therapy in elderly patients with and without acute coronary syndromes. J Am Med Assoc 288(4):462–467Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kashner TM (1998) Agreement between administrative files and written medical records: A case of the department of veterans affairs. Med Care 36:1324–1336Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kulldorff M (1997) A spatial scan statistic. Commun Stat Theor 26(6):1481–1496Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kulldorff M, Davis RL, Kolczak M, Lewis E, Platt1 TLR (2011) A maximized sequential probability ratio test for drug and vaccine safety surveillance. Sequential Anal 30:58–78Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kulldorff M, Fang Z, Walsh SJ (2003) A tree-based scan statistic for database disease surveillance. Biometrics 59(2):323–331Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lagerqvist B, James SK, Stenestrand U, Lindbck J, Nilsson T, Wallentin L, SCAAR Study Group (2007) Long-term outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in sweden. New Engl J Med 356(10):1009–1019Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lanza LL, Walker AM, Bortnichak EA, Gause DO, Dreyer NA (1995) Incidence of symptomatic liver function abnormalities in a cohort of nsaid users. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 4:231–237Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lawthers AG, McCarthy EP, Davis RB, Peterson LE, Palmer RH, Iezzoni LI (2000) Identification of in-hospital complications from claims data. is it valid? Med Care 38(8):785–795Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN (1998) Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. J Am Med Assoc 279(15):1200–1205Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Li L, Kulldorff M (2010) A conditional maximized sequential probability ratio test for pharmacovigilance. Stat Med 29(2):284–295Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lieu TA, Kulldorff M, Davis RL, Lewis EM, Weintraub E, Yih K, Yin R, Brown JS, Platt R, for the Vaccine Safety Datalink Rapid Cycle Analysis Team (2007) Real-time vaccine safety surveillance for the early detection of adverse events. Med Care 45(10 Suppl 2):S89–S95Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Little RJ, Rubin DB (2000) Causal effects in clinical and epidemiological studies via potential outcomes: Concepts and analytical approaches. Annu Rev Publ Health 21:121–145Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mitchell JB, Ballard DJ, Whisnant JP, Ammering CJ, Matchar DB, Samsa GP (1996) Using physician claims to identify postoperative complications of carotid endarterectomy. Health Serv Res 31:141–152Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Musonda P, Hocine MN, Andrews NJ, Tubert-Bitter P, Farrington CP (2008) Monitoring vaccine safety using case series cumulative sum charts. Vaccine 26(42):5358–5367Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Naus JI (1965) Clustering of random points in two dimensions. Biometrika 52(1/2):263–267Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Naus JI (1965) The distribution of the size of the maximum cluster of points on a line. J Am Med Assoc 60(310): 532–538Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nissen SE, Wolski K (2010) Rosiglitazone revisited: An updated meta-analysis of risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. Arch Intern Med 170(14):1191–1201Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Okunseri C, Szabo A, Jackson S, Pajewski NM, Garcia RI (2009) Increased childrens access to fluoride varnish treatment by involving medical care providers: Effect of a medicaid policy change. Health Serv Res 44:1144–1156Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Piecoro LT, Potoski M, Talbert JC, Doherty DE (2002) Asthma prevalence, cost, and adherence with expert guidelines on the utilization of health care services and costs in a state medicaid population. Health Serv Res 36:357–371Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pletcher MJ, Lazar L, Bibbins-Domingo K, Moran A, Rodondi N, Coxson P, Lightwood J, Williams L, Goldman L (2011) Comparing impact and cost-effectiveness of primary prevention strategies for lipid-lowering. Ann Intern Med 150:243–254Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Postila V, Kilpi T (2004) Use of vaccine surveillance data in the evaluation of safety of vaccines. Vaccine 22(15–16):2076–2079Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Reginster J-Y, Felsenberg D, Boonen S, Diez-Perez A, Rizzoli R, Brandi M-L, Spector TD, Brixen K, Goemaere S, Cormier C, Balogh A, Delmas PD, Meunier PJ (2008) Effects of long-term strontium ranelate treatment on the risk of nonvertebral and vertebral fractures in postmenopausal osteoporosis: Results of a five-year, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 58(6):1687–1695Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1985) Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The Am Stat 39:33–38Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group (1994) Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: The scandinavian simvastatin survival study (4s). The Lancet 344:1383–1389Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Storey JD (2002) A direct approach to false discovery rates. J Roy Stat Soc B (Stat Met) 64(3):479–498Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Storey JD (2003) The positive false discovery rate: A bayesian interpretation and the q-value. The Ann Stat 31(6):2013–2035Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Strandberg TE, Pyrl K, Cook TJ, Wilhelmsen L, Faergeman O, Thorgeirsson G, Pedersen TR, Kjekshus J, S Group (2004) Mortality and incidence of cancer during 10-year follow-up of the scandinavian simvastatin survival study (4s). Lancet 364(9436):771–777Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    R. Tamblyn, R. Laprise, J. A. Hanley, M. Abrahamowicz, S. Scott, N. Mayo, J. Hurley, R. Grad, E. Latimer, R. Perreault, P. McLeod, A. Huang, P. Larochelle, and L. Mallet (2001) Adverse events associated with prescription drug cost-sharing among poor and elderly persons. J Am Med Assoc 285(4):421–429Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    The American Health Data Institute (2011) Icd-9 outline. http://www.ahdi.com/ICD9.pdf. Accessed 27 July 2011
  62. 62.
    Thom T, Haase N, Rosamond W, Howard VJ, Rumsfeld J, Manolio T, Zheng Z-J, Flegal K, O’Donnell C, Kittner S, Lloyd-Jones D, Goff DC, Hong Y, Adams R, Friday G, Furie K, Gorelick P, Kissela B, Marler J, Meigs J, Roger V, Sidney S, Sorlie P, Steinberger J, Wasserthiel-Smoller S, Wilson M, Wolf P, American Heart Association Statistics Committee, Stroke Statistics Subcommittee (2006) Heart disease and stroke statistics–2006 update: A report from the american heart association statistics committee and stroke statistics subcommittee. Circulation 113(6):e85–151Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    US Department of health and Human Services, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2010) The sentinel initiative. an update on fda’s progress in building a national electronic system for monitoring the postmarket safety of fda-approved drugs and other medical products. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Safety/FDAsSentinelInitiative/UCM233360.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2011
  64. 64.
    US Food and Drug Administration (2011) Actos-prescribing information. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2007/021073s031lbl.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2011
  65. 65.
    US Food and Drug Administration (2010) The sentinel initiative: National strategy for monitoring medical product safety. http://www.fda.gov/Safety/FDAsSentinelInitiative/default.htm. Accessed 27 May 2011
  66. 66.
    US Food and Drug Administration (2005) Alert for healthcare professionals pemoline tablets and chewable tablets (marketed as cylert). http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm126462.pdf. Accessed 14 June 2011
  67. 67.
    Vittinghoff E, McCulloch CE, Woo C, Cummings SR (2010) Estimating long-term effects of treatment from placebo-controlled trials with an extension period, using virtual twins. Stat Med 29:1127–1136Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wald A (1945) Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. The Ann Math Stat 16:117–186Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Weinstein RS, Roberson PK, Manolagas SC (2009) Giant osteoclast formation and long-term oral bisphosphonate therapy. N Engl J Med 360(1):53–62Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Wysowski DK, Swartz L (2005) Adverse drug event surveillance and drug withdrawals in the united states, 1969–2002: The importance of reporting suspected reactions. Arch Intern Med 165(12):1363–1369Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Yih WK, Kulldorff M, Fireman BH, Shui IM, Lewis EM, Klein NP, Baggs J, Weintraub ES, Belongia EA, Naleway A, Gee J, Platt R, Lieu TA (2011) Active surveillance for adverse events: The experience of the vaccine safety datalink project. Pediatrics 127:S54–S64Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Zhou W, Pool V, Iskander JK, English-Bullard R, Ball R, Wise RP, Haber P, Pless RP, Mootrey G, Ellenberg SS, Braun MM, Chen RT (2003) Surveillance for safety after immunization: Vaccine adverse event reporting system (vaers)–united states, 1991–2001. MMWR Surveill Summ 52(1):1–24Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College ParkUSA
  2. 2.San JoseUSA

Personalised recommendations