Validation of a Novel Method to Assess the Clinical Quality of Information in Pregnancy‑Related Pharmacovigilance Case Reports: A ConcePTION Project

• Published in: Drug safety Vol. 47; no. 3; pp. 261 - 270
• Main Authors: van Rijt-Weetink, Yrea R J, Egberts, Tolne C G, van Hunsel, Florence P A M, Lewis, David J, Yates, Laura M, Winterfeld, Ursula, van Puijenbroek, Eugène P
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Auckland Springer Nature B.V 01.03.2024
• Subjects: Case reports; Causality; Data collection; Information services; Methods; Pharmacovigilance; Pregnancy; Quality assessment; Quality control; Sensitivity; United Kingdom > UK
• ISSN: 0114-5916; 1179-1942
• DOI: 10.1007/540264-023-01389-y

Background To assess the causal relationship between a medicinal product and a reported event, relevant information needs to be present. Information elements for assessing cases of exposure to medicinal products during pregnancy were predefined and used in a new tool to assess the quality of information. However, the extent in which the presence or absence of these predefined information elements is associated with the overall clinical quality of these cases, as evaluated by pharmacovigilance experts, remains uncertain. Objective We aimed to validate a novel method to assess the clinical quality of information in real-world pregnancy pharmacovigilance case reports. Methods The clinical quality of case reports regarding medicinal product exposure and pregnancy-related outcomes was appraised from spontaneous reports, literature, Teratology Information Services (UK and Switzerland), The Dutch Pregnancy Drug Register, the Gilenya pregnancy registry and the Enhanced PV programme of Novartis. Assessment was done by means of the novel standardised tool based on the presence and relevance of information, and by expert judgement. The novel tool was validated compared to the expert assessment as the gold standard expressed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves, after which the sensitivity and specificity were calculated using cross-tabulations. Inter-rater variability was determined by means of weighted Cohens kappa. Results One hundred and eighty-six case reports were included. The clinical quality score as assessed by the novel method was divided into three categories with cut-off values of 45% (poor to intermediate) and 65% (intermediate to excellent). Sensitivity was 0.93 and 0.96 for poor to intermediate and intermediate to excellent, respectively. Specificity was respectively 0.52 and 0.73. Inter-rater variability was 0.65 (95% confidence interval 0.53-0.78) for the newly developed approach, and 0.40 (95% confidence interval 0.28-0.52) for the gold standard assessment. Conclusions The tool described in this study using the presence and relevance of elements of information is the first designed, validated and standardised method for the assessment of the quality of information of case reports in pregnancy pharmacovigilance data. This method confers less inter-rater variability compared with a quality assessment by experts of pregnancy-related pharmacovigilance data.