A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions

Abstract

The estimation of the probability that a drug caused an adverse clinical event is usually based on clinical judgment. Lack of a method for establishing causality generates large between‐raters and within‐raters variability in assessment. Using the conventional categories and definitions of definite, probable, possible, and doubtful adverse drug reactions (ADRs), the between‐raters agreement of two physicians and four pharmacists who independently assessed 63 randomly selected alleged ADRs was 38% to 63%, kappa (k, a chance‐corrected index of agreement) varied from 0.21 to 0.40, and the intraclass correlation coefficient of reliability (R[est]) was 0.49. Six (testing) and 22 wk (retesting) later the same observers independently reanalyzed the 63 cases by assigning a weighted score (ADR probability scale) to each of the components that must be considered in establishing causal associations between drug(s) and adverse events (e.g., temporal sequence). The cases were randomized to minimize the influence of learning. The event was assigned a probability category from the total score. The between‐raters reliability (range: percent agreement = 83% to 92%; κ = 0.69 to 0.86; r = 0.91 to 0.95; R(est) = 0.92) and within‐raters reliability (range: percent agreement = 80% to 97%; κ = 0.64 to 0.95; r = 0.91 to 0.98) improved (p < 0.001). The between‐raters reliability was maintained on retesting (range: r = 0.84 to 0.94; R(est) = 0.87). The between‐raters reliability of three attending physicians who independently assessed 28 other prospectively collected cases of alleged ADRs was very high (range: r = 0.76 to 0.87; R(est) = 0.80). It was also shown that the ADR probability scale has consensual, content, and concurrent validity. This systematic method offers a sensitive way to monitor ADRs and may be applicable to postmarketing drug surveillance. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (1981) 30, 239–245; doi:

Clinical Experience with Intravenous Lipid Emulsion for Drug-Induced Cardiovascular Collapse

“…In our population, ALI resulted in 33% of patients' post-administration of ILE. While our study cannot prove causality, the Naranjo ADR likelihood [5] was classified as a score of 1/12 (i.e., possibly related). Additionally, it is difficult to calculate risk of ALI in our subset of patients who were already predisposed for ALI due to hypotension, drug effect on alveolar capillary permeability, or aspiration.…”

“…Adverse events were defined as a presenting or acquired condition that led to prolongation of hospitalization or need for medical or surgical intervention. Attribution of adverse events was determined by assignment of the Naranjo adverse drug reaction (ADR) likelihood [5].…”

“…The Naranjo ADR likelihood was used in this study and has been described elsewhere [5]. Briefly, adjudicators independently answered ten questions related to whether IVLE caused the ADR assigning answers of "yes", "no", or "don't know" with points assigned for each answer (see Table 1).…”

Valproic acid induced acute liver injury resulting in hepatic encephalopathy- a case report and literature review

“…As an essential part of adverse drug reaction (ADR), causality assessment was done using the Naranjo scale and RHUCAM score [23,24]. Naranjo scale concluded a definitive ADR with a score of 10 (> 9 is definitive) as shown in (Table 1).…”

Patient risk factors and adverse drug interactions in the treatment of acute gouty arthritis in the elderly: a case report

“…In the Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale [16], a score of +3 indicates the overall probability that the adverse event represents an adverse reaction to colchicine as “possible” (Table 1). Drug-Drug and drug-patient interaction likely have contributed to the treatment's complication.…”