Data-Driven Extraction of Quantitative Multi-dimensional Associations of Cardiovascular Drugs and Adverse Drug Reactions

  • Upasana Chutia
  • Jerry W. Sangma
  • Vipin PalEmail author
  • YogitaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1005)


Early detection of adverse drug reactions as a part of post-marketing surveillance is very crucial for saving a number of persons from unwanted consequences of drugs. Along with the drug, patient’s traits such as age, gender, weight, location are key factors for occurrence of adverse effects. The relationship between drug, patient attributes and adverse drug effects can be precisely represented by quantitative multi-dimensional association rules. But discovery of such rules faces the challenge of data sparsity because of the large number of possible side effects of a drug and fewer number of corresponding data records. In this paper, to address the data sparsity issue, we propose to use variable support based LPMiner technique for detecting quantitative multi-dimensional association rules. For experimental analysis, data corresponding to three cardiovascular drugs namely Rivaroxaban, Ranolazine and Alteplase has been taken from U.S. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database. The experimental results show that based on LPMiner technique a number of association rules have been detected which went undetected in case of constant support based apriori and FP-Growth technique.


Multi-dimensional associations rules Pharmacovigilance Data mining Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) 


  1. 1.
    George, C.: Reporting Adverse Drug Reactions: A Guide for Healthcare Professionals. British Medical Association, London (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rockville, M.D.: Reducing and Preventing Adverse Drug Events To Decrease Hospital Costs: Research in Action. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Issue 1, March 2014Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, Y., Guo, J.J., Steinbuch, M.: Comparison of sensitivity and timing of early signal detection of four frequently used signal detection methods: an empirical study based on the US FDA adverse event reporting system database. Pharm Med. 22, 359–365 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    World Health Organization (WHO): The Importance of Pharmacovigilance: Safety Monitoring of Medicinal Products (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lindquist, M.: The need for definitions in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf. 30, 825–830 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    World Health Organization: The Importance of Pharmacovigilance. WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring, Geneva, vol. 44 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FAERS quarterly data files. Accessed Oct 2018
  8. 8.
    Han, J., Kamber, M.: Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2011)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, C., et al.: Exploration of the association rules mining technique for the signal detection of adverse drug events in spontaneous reporting systems. PloS One 7(7) (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yildirim, P., Ilyas, O., Holzinger, A.: On knowledge discovery in open medical data on the example of the FDA drug adverse event reporting system for alendronate (FOSAMAX). In: Holzinger, A., Pasi, G. (eds.) Human-Computer Interaction and Knowledge Discovery in Complex, Unstructured, Big Data, pp. 195–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reps, J.M., Aickelin, U., Ma, J., Zhang, Y.: Refining adverse drug reactions using association rule mining for electronic healthcare data. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshop (ICDMW 2014), pp. 763–770 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang, X., Albin, A., Ren, K., Zhang, P., Etter, J.P., Lin, S., Li, L.: Efficiently mining adverse event reporting system for multiple drug interactions. AMIA Summits Transl. Sci. Proc. 120 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Agrawal, R., Srikant, R.: Fast algorithms for mining association rules. In: Proceedings of 20th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, VLDB, vol. 1215 (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Han, J., Pei, J., Yin, Y.: Mining frequent patterns without candidate generation. In: ACM SIGMOD Record, vol. 29, no. 2. ACM (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seno, M., Karypis, G.: LPMiner: an algorithm for finding frequent itemsets using length-decreasing support constraint. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2001) (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tan, P.-N.: Introduction to Data Mining. Pearson Education India, New Delhi (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sakaeda, T., Kadoyama, K., Okuno, Y.: Adverse event profiles of platinum agents: data mining of the public version of the FDA adverse event reporting system, AERS, and reproducibility of clinical observations. Int. J. Med. Sci. 8(6), 487–491 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dixon, J.K.: Pattern recognition with partly missing data. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 9, 617–621 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of Technology MeghalayaShillongIndia

Personalised recommendations