Pharmacovigilance involves continually monitoring drug safety after drugs
are put to market. To aid this process; algorithms for the identification of
strongly correlated drug/adverse drug reaction (ADR) pairs from data sources
such as adverse event reporting systems or Electronic Health Records have been
developed. These methods are generally statistical in nature, and do not draw
upon the large volumes of knowledge embedded in the biomedical literature. In
this paper, we investigate the ability of scalable Literature Based Discovery
(LBD) methods to identify side effects of pharmaceutical agents. The advantage
of LBD methods is that they can provide evidence from the literature to support
the plausibility of a drug/ ADR association, thereby assisting human review to
validate the signal, which is an essential component of pharmacovigilance. To do
so, we draw upon vast repositories of knowledge that has been extracted from the
biomedical literature by two Natural Language Processing tools, MetaMap and
SemRep. We evaluate two LBD methods that scale comfortably to the volume of
knowledge available in these repositories. Specifically, we evaluate Reflective
Random Indexing (RRI), a model based on concept-level co-occurrence, and
Predication-based Semantic Indexing (PSI), a model that encodes the nature of
the relationship between concepts to support reasoning analogically about
drug-effect relationships. An evaluation set was constructed from the Side
Effect Resource 2 (SIDER2), which contains known drug/ADR relations, and models
were evaluated for their ability to “rediscover” these
relations. In this paper, we demonstrate that both RRI and PSI can recover known
drug-adverse event associations. However, PSI performed better overall, and has
the additional advantage of being able to recover the literature underlying the
reasoning pathways it used to make its predictions.