Skip to main content
Log in

Signal Selection and Follow-Up in Pharmacovigilance

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Drug Safety Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The detection of unknown and unexpected connections between drug exposure and adverse events is one of the major challenges of pharmacovigilance. For the identification of possible connections in large databases, automated statistical systems have been introduced with promising results. From the large numbers of associations so produced, the human mind has to identify signals that are likely to be important, in need of further assessment and follow-up and that may require regulatory action. Such decisions are based on a variety of clinical, epidemiological, pharmacological and regulatory criteria. Likewise, there are a number of criteria that underlie the subsequent evaluation of such signals. A good understanding of the logic underlying these processes fosters rational pharmacovigilance and efficient drug regulation. In the future a combination of quantitative and qualitative criteria may be incorporated in automated signal detection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Table V
Table VI
Table VII
Table VIII

References

  1. Olsson S. The role of the WHO programme on international drug monitoring in coordinating worldwide drug safety efforts. Drug Saf 1998; 19: 1–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bate A, Lindquist M, Edwards IR, et al. A Bayesian neural network method for adverse drug reaction signal generation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1998; 54: 315–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Meyboom RHB, Egberts ACG, Edwards IR, et al. Principles of signal detection in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997; 16: 355–65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bate A, Lindquist M, Orre R, et al. Data mining analyses of pharmacovigilance signals in relation to relevant comparison drugs. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. In press

  5. Egberts ACG, Meyboom RHB, De Koning FHP, et al. Non-puerperal lactation associated with antidepressant drug use. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 44: 277–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Natsch S, Vinks MHAM, Voogt AK, et al. Anaphylactic reactions to proton-pump inhibitors. Ann Pharmacother 2000; 34: 474–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lindquist M, Ståhl M, Bate A, et al. A retrospective evaluation of a data mining approach to aid finding new adverse drug reaction signals in the WHO international database. Drug Saf 2000; 23: 533–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Meyboom RHB, Egberts ACG, Gribnau FWJ, et al. Causal or casual?. The role of causality assessment in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997; 16: 374–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Meyboom RHB, Hekster YA, Egberts ACG, et al. Pharmacovigilance in perspective. Drug Saf 1997; 21: 429–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the valuable discussions regarding signal detection during recent meetings of the Uppsala Monitoring Centre Signal Review Panel.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronald H.B. Meyboom.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meyboom, R.H., Lindquist, M., Egberts, A.C. et al. Signal Selection and Follow-Up in Pharmacovigilance. Drug-Safety 25, 459–465 (2002). https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200225060-00011

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200225060-00011

Keywords

Navigation