Validation of an Automated Safety Surveillance System with Prospective, Randomized Trial Data

Author:

Matheny Michael E.1,Morrow David A.2,Ohno-Machado Lucila3,Cannon Christopher P.4,Sabatine Marc S.4,Resnic Frederic S.5

Affiliation:

1. Division of General Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, , Decision Systems Group, Department of Radiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA

2. TIMI Study Group, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, Division of Cardiology

3. Division of Health Sciences & Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, Decision Systems Group, Department of Radiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA

4. TIMI Study Group, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, Division of Cardiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA

5. Division of Cardiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, Decision Systems Group, Department of Radiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA

Abstract

Objective. We sought to validate 3 methods for automated safety monitoring by evaluating clinical trials with elevated adverse events. Methods. An automated outcomes surveillance system was used to retrospectively analyze data from 2 randomized, TIMI multicenter trials. Trial A was stopped early due to elevated 30-day mortality rates in the intervention arm. Trial B was not stopped early, but there was transient concern regarding 30-day intracranial hemorrhage rates. We compared statistical process control (SPC), logistic regression risk adjusted SPC (LR-SPC), and Bayesian updating statistic (BUS) methods with a standard prospective 2-arm event rate analysis. Each method compares observed event rates to alerting boundaries established with previously collected data. In this evaluation, the control arms approximated prior data, and the intervention arms approximated the observed data. Results. Trial A experienced elevated 30-day mortality rates beginning 7 months after the start of the trial and continuing until termination at month 14. Trial B did not experience elevated major bleeding rates. Combining the alerting performance of each method across both trials resulted in sensitivities and specificities of 100% and 85% for SPC, 0% and 100% for BUS, and 100% and 93% for both LR-SPC models, respectively. Conclusion. Both SPC and LR-SPC methods correctly identified the majority of months during which the cumulative event rates were elevated in trial A but were susceptible to false positive alerts in trial B. The BUS method did not result in any alerts in either trial and requires revision.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

Cited by 21 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3