Journal Article

The Reporting of a Disproportionality Analysis for Drug Safety Signal Detection Using Individual Case Safety Reports in PharmacoVigilance (READUS-PV): Development and Statement

Tuccori, Marco, Salvo, Francesco, van Puijenbroek, Eugène, Mahaux, Olivia, Noguchi, Yoshihiro, Brueckner, Andreas, Manlik, Katrin, Dolladille, Charles, Drici, Milou-Daniel, Bate, Andrew, Onakpoya, Igho J., Pariente, Antoine, Cutroneo, Paola Maria, Khouri, Charles, Battini, Vera, Norén, G. Niklas, Carnovale, Carla, Hauben, Manfred, Raschi, Emanuel, Poluzzi, Elisabetta, Noseda, Roberta, Goldman, Adam, van Hunsel, Florence, Salem, Myriam, Candore, Gianmario, AlShammari, Thamir M., Begaud, Bernard, Crisafulli, Salvatore, Montastruc, François, Trinh, Nhung T. H., Fusaroli, Michele, Herdeiro, Maria Teresa, Sartori, Daniele, Faillie, Jean-Luc

2024

Overview

Background and aim Disproportionality analyses using reports of suspected adverse drug reactions are the most commonly used quantitative methods for detecting safety signals in pharmacovigilance. However, their methods and results are generally poorly reported in published articles and existing guidelines do not capture the specific features of disproportionality analyses. We here describe the development of a guideline (REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance [READUS-PV]) for reporting the results of disproportionality analyses in articles and abstracts. Methods We established a group of 34 international experts from universities, the pharmaceutical industry, and regulatory agencies, with expertise in pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses, and assessment of safety signals. We followed a three-step process to develop the checklist: (1) an open-text survey to generate a first list of items; (2) an online Delphi method to select and rephrase the most important items; (3) a final online consensus meeting. Results Among the panel members, 33 experts responded to round 1 and 30 to round 2 of the Delphi and 25 participated to the consensus meeting. Overall, 60 recommendations for the main body of the manuscript and 13 recommendations for the abstracts were retained by participants after the Delphi method. After merging of some items together and the online consensus meeting, the READUS-PV guidelines comprise a checklist of 32 recommendations, in 14 items, for the reporting of disproportionality analyses in the main body text and four items, comprising 12 recommendations, for abstracts. Conclusions The READUS-PV guidelines will support authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and users of disproportionality analyses using individual case safety report databases. Adopting these guidelines will lead to more transparent, comprehensive, and accurate reporting and interpretation of disproportionality analyses, facilitating the integration with other sources of evidence.

• Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC,Springer International Publishing,Springer Nature B.V,Springer Verlag
• Subject: Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/standards / Bibliometrics / Check lists / Checklist / Consensus / Delphi method / Delphi Technique / Drug Safety and Pharmacovigilance / Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology / Guidelines / Guidelines as Topic / Human health and pathology / Humans / Life Sciences / Medicine / Medicine & Public Health / Methods / Observational studies / Original Research Article / Pharmaceutical industry / Pharmacology/Toxicology / Pharmacovigilance / Pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analysis, spontaneous reporting systems / Product safety / Regulatory agencies / Safety / Side effects / Signal detection