» Articles » PMID: 37243963

Development and Application of an Active Pharmacovigilance Framework Based on Electronic Healthcare Records from Multiple Centers in Korea

Abstract

Introduction: With the availability of retrospective pharmacovigilance data, the common data model (CDM) has been identified as an efficient approach towards anonymized multicenter analysis; however, the establishment of a suitable model for individual medical systems and applications supporting their analysis is a challenge.

Objective: The aim of this study was to construct a specialized Korean CDM (K-CDM) for pharmacovigilance systems based on a clinical scenario to detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

Methods: De-identified patient records (n = 5,402,129) from 13 institutions were converted to the K-CDM. From 2005 to 2017, 37,698,535 visits, 39,910,849 conditions, 259,594,727 drug exposures, and 30,176,929 procedures were recorded. The K-CDM, which comprises three layers, is compatible with existing models and is potentially adaptable to extended clinical research. Local codes for electronic medical records (EMRs), including diagnosis, drug prescriptions, and procedures, were mapped using standard vocabulary. Distributed queries based on clinical scenarios were developed and applied to K-CDM through decentralized or distributed networks.

Results: Meta-analysis of drug relative risk ratios from ten institutions revealed that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increased the risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage by twofold compared with aspirin, and non-vitamin K anticoagulants decreased cerebrovascular bleeding risk by 0.18-fold compared with warfarin.

Conclusion: These results are similar to those from previous studies and are conducive for new research, thereby demonstrating the feasibility of K-CDM for pharmacovigilance. However, the low quality of original EMR data, incomplete mapping, and heterogeneity between institutions reduced the validity of the analysis, thus necessitating continuous calibration among researchers, clinicians, and the government.

Citing Articles

Towards cross-application model-agnostic federated cohort discovery.

Dobbins N, Morris M, Sadhu E, MacFadden D, Nazaire M, Simons W J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2024; 31(10):2202-2209.

PMID: 39110920 PMC: 11413448. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocae211.


Why Pharmacovigilance of Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs is Important in India?.

Dash S, Singh P, Bajwa N, Choudhury A, Bisht P, Sharma R Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets. 2023; 24(7):731-748.

PMID: 37855282 DOI: 10.2174/0118715303247469230926092404.

References
1.
Aronson J, Ferner R . Clarification of terminology in drug safety. Drug Saf. 2005; 28(10):851-70. DOI: 10.2165/00002018-200528100-00003. View

2.
Suh D, Woodall B, Shin S . Clinical and economic impact of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients. Ann Pharmacother. 2001; 34(12):1373-9. DOI: 10.1345/aph.10094. View

3.
Davies E, Green C, Taylor S, Williamson P, Mottram D, Pirmohamed M . Adverse drug reactions in hospital in-patients: a prospective analysis of 3695 patient-episodes. PLoS One. 2009; 4(2):e4439. PMC: 2635959. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004439. View

4.
Fattinger K, Roos M, Vergeres P, Holenstein C, Kind B, Masche U . Epidemiology of drug exposure and adverse drug reactions in two swiss departments of internal medicine. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2000; 49(2):158-67. PMC: 2014906. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2125.2000.00132.x. View

5.
Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P . Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA. 1998; 279(15):1200-5. DOI: 10.1001/jama.279.15.1200. View