Dataset Information

Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Regulatory agencies, such as the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada, are requiring the public sharing of clinical trial reports that are used to make drug approval decisions. Both agencies have provided guidance for the quantitative anonymization of these clinical reports before they are shared. There is limited empirical information on the effectiveness of this approach in protecting patient privacy for clinical trial data.

Methods

In this paper we empirically test the hypothesis that when these guidelines are implemented in practice, they provide adequate privacy protection to patients. An anonymized clinical study report for a trial on a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that is sold as a prescription eye drop was subjected to re-identification. The target was 500 patients in the USA. Only suspected matches to real identities were reported.

Results

Six suspected matches with low confidence scores were identified. Each suspected match took 24.2?h of effort. Social media and death records provided the most useful information for getting the suspected matches.

Conclusions

These results suggest that the anonymization guidance from these agencies can provide adequate privacy protection for patients, and the modes of attack can inform further refinements of the methodologies they recommend in their guidance for manufacturers.

SUBMITTER: Branson J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7029478 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations.

Branson Janice J Good Nathan N Chen Jung-Wei JW Monge Will W Probst Christian C El Emam Khaled K

Trials 20200218 1

<h4>Background</h4>Regulatory agencies, such as the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada, are requiring the public sharing of clinical trial reports that are used to make drug approval decisions. Both agencies have provided guidance for the quantitative anonymization of these clinical reports before they are shared. There is limited empirical information on the effectiveness of this approach in protecting patient privacy for clinical trial data.<h4>Methods</h4>In this paper we empirically ...[more]

PMID: 32070405

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA common disclosure control practice for health datasets is to identify small geographic areas and either suppress records from these small areas or aggregate them into larger ones. A recent study provided a method for deciding when an area is too small based on the uniqueness criterion. The uniqueness criterion stipulates that an the area is no longer too small when the proportion of unique individuals on the relevant variables (the quasi-identifiers) approaches zero. However, using a uniqueness value of zero is quite a stringent threshold, and is only suitable when the risks from data disclosure are quite high. Other uniqueness thresholds that have been proposed for health data are 5% and 20%.MethodsWe estimated uniqueness for urban Forward Sortation Areas (FSAs) by using the 2001 long form Canadian census data representing 20% of the population. We then constructed two logistic regression models to predict when the uniqueness is greater than the 5% and 20% thresholds, and validated their predictive accuracy using 10-fold cross-validation. Predictor variables included the population size of the FSA and the maximum number of possible values on the quasi-identifiers (the number of equivalence classes).ResultsAll model parameters were significant and the models had very high prediction accuracy, with specificity above 0.9, and sensitivity at 0.87 and 0.74 for the 5% and 20% threshold models respectively. The application of the models was illustrated with an analysis of the Ontario newborn registry and an emergency department dataset. At the higher thresholds considerably fewer records compared to the 0% threshold would be considered to be in small areas and therefore undergo disclosure control actions. We have also included concrete guidance for data custodians in deciding which one of the three uniqueness thresholds to use (0%, 5%, 20%), depending on the mitigating controls that the data recipients have in place, the potential invasion of privacy if the data is disclosed, and the motives and capacity of the data recipient to re-identify the data.ConclusionThe models we developed can be used to manage the re-identification risk from small geographic areas. Being able to choose among three possible thresholds, a data custodian can adjust the definition of "small geographic area" to the nature of the data and recipient.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious research focused on the clinical evidence supporting new cancer drugs' initial US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. However, targeted drugs are increasingly approved for supplementary indications of unknown evidence and benefit.ObjectivesTo examine the clinical trial evidence supporting new targeted cancer drugs' initial and supplementary indication approval in the US, EU, Canada, and Australia.Data and methods25 cancer drugs across 100 indications were identified with FDA approval between 2009-2019. Data on regulatory approval and clinical trials were extracted from the FDA, European Medicines Agency (EMA), Health Canada (HC), Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), and clinicaltrials.gov. Regional variations were compared with χ2-tests. Multivariate logistic regressions compared characteristics of initial and supplementary indication approvals, reporting adjusted odds ratios (AOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsOut of 100 considered cancer indications, the FDA approved 96, the EMA 92, HC 86, and the TGA 83 (83%, p < 0.05). The FDA more frequently granted priority review, conditional approval, and orphan designations than other agencies. Initial approvals were more likely to receive conditional / accelerated approval (AOR: 2.69, 95%CI [1.07-6.77], p < 0.05), an orphan designation (AOR: 3.32, 95%CI [1.38-8.00], p < 0.01), be under priority review (AOR: 2.60, 95%CI [1.17-5.78], p < 0.05), and be monotherapies (AOR: 5.91, 95%CI [1.14-30.65], p < 0.05) than supplementary indications. Initial indications' pivotal trials tended to be shorter (AOR per month: 0.96, 95%CI [0.93-0.99], p < 0.05), of lower phase design (AOR per clinical phase: 0.28, 95%CI [0.09-0.85], p < 0.05), and enroll more patients (AOR per 100 patients: 1.19, 95%CI [1.01-1.39], p < 0.05).ConclusionsTargeted cancer drugs are increasingly approved for multiple indications of varying clinical benefit. Drugs are first approved as monotherapies in rare diseases with a high unmet need. Whilst expedited regulatory review incentivizes this prioritization, indication-specific safety, efficacy, and pricing policies are necessary to reflect each indication's differential clinical and economic value.

Project description:Harvesting alters demography and life histories of exploited populations, and there is mounting evidence that rapid phenotypic changes at the individual level can occur when harvest is intensive. Therefore, recreational fishing is expected to induce both ecological and rapid evolutionary changes in fish populations and consequently requires rigorous management. However, little is known about the coupled demographic and evolutionary consequences of alternative harvest regulations in managed freshwater fisheries. We used a structurally realistic individual-based model and implemented an eco-genetic approach that accounts for microevolution, phenotypic plasticity, adaptive behavior, density-dependent processes, and cryptic mortality sources (illegal harvest and hooking mortality after catch and release). We explored the consequences of a range of harvest regulations, involving different combinations of exploitation intensity and minimum and maximum-length limits, on the eco-evolutionary trajectories of a freshwater fish stock. Our 100-year simulations of size-selective harvest through recreational fishing produced negative demographic and structural changes in the simulated population, but also plastic and evolutionary responses that compensated for such changes and prevented population collapse even under intense fishing pressure and liberal harvest regulations. Fishing-induced demographic and evolutionary changes were driven by the harvest regime, and the strength of responses increased with increasing exploitation intensity and decreasing restriction in length limits. Cryptic mortality strongly amplified the impacts of harvest and might be exerting a selective pressure that opposes that of size-selective harvest. "Slot" limits on harvestable length had overall positive effects but lower than expected ability to buffer harvest impacts. Harvest regulations strongly shape the eco-evolutionary dynamics of exploited fish stocks and thus should be considered in setting management policies. Our findings suggest that plastic and evolutionary responses buffer the demographic impacts of fishing, but intense fishing pressure and liberal harvest regulations may lead to an unstructured, juvenescent population that would put the sustainability of the stock at risk. Our study also indicates that high rates of cryptic mortality may make harvest regulations based on harvest slot limits ineffective.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets