IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v43y2020i1d10.1007_s40264-019-00869-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of Augmented Intelligence for Pharmacovigilance Case Seriousness Determination

Author

Listed:
  • Ramani Routray

    (IBM Watson Health)

  • Niki Tetarenko

    (Celgene)

  • Claire Abu-Assal

    (IBM Watson Health)

  • Ruta Mockute

    (Celgene)

  • Bruno Assuncao

    (Celgene)

  • Hanqing Chen

    (IBM Watson Health)

  • Shenghua Bao

    (IBM Watson Health)

  • Karolina Danysz

    (Celgene)

  • Sameen Desai

    (Celgene)

  • Salvatore Cicirello

    (Celgene)

  • Van Willis

    (IBM Watson Health)

  • Sharon Hensley Alford

    (IBM Watson Health)

  • Vivek Krishnamurthy

    (IBM Watson Health)

  • Edward Mingle

    (Celgene)

Abstract

Introduction Identification of adverse events and determination of their seriousness ensures timely detection of potential patient safety concerns. Adverse event seriousness is a key factor in defining reporting timelines and is often performed manually by pharmacovigilance experts. The dramatic increase in the volume of safety reports necessitates exploration of scalable solutions that also meet reporting timeline requirements. Objective The aim of this study was to develop an augmented intelligence methodology for automatically identifying adverse event seriousness in spontaneous, solicited, and medical literature safety reports. Deep learning models were evaluated for accuracy and/or the F1 score against a ground truth labeled by pharmacovigilance experts. Methods Using a stratified random sample of safety reports received by Celgene, we developed three neural networks for addressing identification of adverse event seriousness: (1) a binary adverse-event level seriousness classifier; (2) a classifier for determining seriousness categorization at the adverse-event level; and (3) an annotator for identifying seriousness criteria terms to provide supporting evidence at the document level. Results The seriousness classifier achieved an accuracy of 83.0% in post-marketing reports, 92.9% in solicited reports, and 86.3% in medical literature reports. F1 scores for seriousness categorization were 77.7 for death, 78.9 for hospitalization, and 75.5 for important medical events. The seriousness annotator achieved an F1 score of 89.9 in solicited reports, and 75.2 in medical literature reports. Conclusions The results of this study indicate that a neural network approach can provide an accurate and scalable solution for potentially augmenting pharmacovigilance practitioner determination of adverse event seriousness in spontaneous, solicited, and medical literature reports.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramani Routray & Niki Tetarenko & Claire Abu-Assal & Ruta Mockute & Bruno Assuncao & Hanqing Chen & Shenghua Bao & Karolina Danysz & Sameen Desai & Salvatore Cicirello & Van Willis & Sharon Hensley Al, 2020. "Application of Augmented Intelligence for Pharmacovigilance Case Seriousness Determination," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 57-66, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40264-019-00869-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-019-00869-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-019-00869-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-019-00869-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew Bate & Steve F. Hobbiger, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence, Real-World Automation and the Safety of Medicines," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 125-132, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s40264-019-00869-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.