Dataset Information

Leveraging Human Genetics to Identify Safety Signals Prior to Drug Marketing Approval and Clinical Use.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

When a new drug or biologic product enters the market, its full spectrum of side effects is not yet fully understood, as use in the real world often uncovers nuances not suggested within the relatively narrow confines of preapproval preclinical and trial work.

Objective

We describe a new, phenome-wide association study (PheWAS)- and evidence-based approach for detection of potential adverse drug effects.

Methods

We leveraged our established platform, which integrates human genetic data with associated phenotypes in electronic health records from 29,722 patients of European ancestry, to identify gene-phenotype associations that may represent known safety issues. We examined PheWAS data and the published literature for 16 genes, each of which encodes a protein targeted by at least one drug or biologic product.

Results

Initial data demonstrated that our novel approach (safety ascertainment using PheWAS [SA-PheWAS]) can replicate published safety information across multiple drug classes, with validated findings for 13 of 16 gene-drug class pairs.

Conclusions

By connecting and integrating in vivo and in silico data, SA-PheWAS offers an opportunity to supplement current methods for predicting or confirming safety signals associated with therapeutic agents.

SUBMITTER: Jerome RN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7398579 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAs a result of the well documented limitations of data collected by spontaneous reporting systems (SRS), such as bias and under-reporting, a number of authors have evaluated the utility of other data sources for the purpose of pharmacovigilance, including the biomedical literature. Previous work has demonstrated the utility of literature-derived distributed representations (concept embeddings) with machine learning for the purpose of drug side-effect prediction. In terms of data sources, these methods are complementary, observing drug safety from two different perspectives (knowledge extracted from the literature and statistics from SRS data). However, the combined utility of these pharmacovigilance methods has yet to be evaluated.ObjectiveThis research investigates the utility of directly or indirectly combining an observational signal from SRS with literature-derived distributed representations into a single feature vector or in an ensemble approach for downstream machine learning (logistic regression).MethodsLeveraging a recently developed representation scheme, concept embeddings were generated from relational connections extracted from the literature and composed to represent drug and associated adverse reactions, as defined by two reference standards of positive (likely causal) and negative (no causal evidence) pairs. Embeddings were presented with and without common measures of observational signal from SRS sources to logistic regressors, and performance was evaluated with the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) metric.ResultsROC AUC performance with these composite models improves up to ≈ 20% over SRS-based disproportionality metrics alone and exceeds the best prior results reported in the literature when models leverage both sources of information.ConclusionsResults from this study support the hypothesis that knowledge extracted from the literature can enhance the performance of SRS-based methods (and vice versa). Across reference sets, using literature and SRS information together performed better than using either source alone, providing strong support for the complementary nature of these approaches to post-marketing drug surveillance.

Project description:BackgroundWe examined how often new serious safety signals were identified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration within the first 2 years after approval for new molecular entities (NMEs) for treatment of cancer that required specific regulatory actions described here.MethodsWe identified, for all NMEs approved for treatment of cancer or malignant hematology indications between 2010 and 2016, substantial safety-related changes within the first 2 years after approval, which included a new Boxed Warning or Warning and Precaution; requirement for (or modification of existing) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS); and withdrawal from the market because of safety concerns.ResultsFifty-five NMEs were approved between 2010 and 2016: 32 (58%) under regular approval (RA) and 23 (42%) under accelerated approval (AA). Of these 55 NMEs, 9 (16%) had substantial safety-related changes after approval. Across all 55 NMEs, one was temporarily withdrawn from the market for safety reasons (1.8%); one (1.8%) required a new REMS; nine required labeling revisions-new Boxed Warnings were required for two NMEs (3.6%), and new Warnings and Precautions subsections were required for eight (14.6%). One drug (ponatinib) was responsible for several of the substantial safety-related changes (withdrawal, REMS, Boxed Warnings). One of 32 NMEs approved under RA required a new Warning and Precaution, whereas 7 of 23 NMEs approved under AA had substantial safety-related changes in the first 2 years after approval.ConclusionBased on our analysis we conclude that although there was a greater incidence of substantial safety-related changes to AA drugs versus RA drugs, the majority of these were changes to the Warnings and Precautions and did not substantially alter the benefit-risk profile of the drug.Implications for practiceThe majority of new cancer drugs (84%) approved in the U.S. do not have new substantial safety information being added to the label within the first 2 years of approval. Unprecedented efficacy seen in contemporary cancer drug development has led to early availability of effective cancer therapies based on large effects in smaller populations. More limited premarket safety data require diligent postmarketing safety surveillance as we continue to learn and update drug labeling throughout the product lifecycle.