Classicnewcar.us


Bringing your projects to a higher level - ppt download

Bringing your projects to a higher level - ppt download

Download presentationWe think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!Buttons: Presentation is loading. Please wait.Published byIrma McCarthy Modified about 1 year ago 1 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_1.jpg", "name": "", "description": "", "width": "800" } 2 CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT OF SUSPECTED AEs Dr. Retesh Kumar Head, Global PhV Department 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_2.jpg", "name": "CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT OF SUSPECTED AEs Dr. Retesh Kumar Head, Global PhV Department 12/13/2015", "description": "CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT OF SUSPECTED AEs Dr. Retesh Kumar Head, Global PhV Department 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 3 What is causality ssessment? Causality assessment is the evaluation of the likelihood that a particular treatment is the cause of an observed event. Decrease ambiguity of data, prevent erroneous conclusions and aid data exchange – Structured and harmonized systemdata exchange ~ 34 different methods: falling into 3 broad approaches approaches Why causality assessment?How we do Causality Assessment? 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_3.jpg", "name": "What is causality ssessment.", "description": "Causality assessment is the evaluation of the likelihood that a particular treatment is the cause of an observed event. Decrease ambiguity of data, prevent erroneous conclusions and aid data exchange – Structured and harmonized systemdata exchange ~ 34 different methods: falling into 3 broad approaches approaches Why causality assessment How we do Causality Assessment. 12/13/2015.", "width": "800" } 4 Major uses of causality assessment Risk benefit assessment Signal detection Evaluation of ADR reports Regulatory purposes An essential component of Pharmacovigilance contributing to better: 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_4.jpg", "name": "Major uses of causality assessment Risk benefit assessment Signal detection Evaluation of ADR reports Regulatory purposes An essential component of Pharmacovigilance contributing to better: 12/13/2015", "description": "Major uses of causality assessment Risk benefit assessment Signal detection Evaluation of ADR reports Regulatory purposes An essential component of Pharmacovigilance contributing to better: 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 5 Causality assessment Three Key Questions Can the drug cause the adverse experience? Has the drug caused the adverse experience? Will the drug cause the adverse experience? 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_5.jpg", "name": "Causality assessment Three Key Questions Can the drug cause the adverse experience.", "description": "Has the drug caused the adverse experience. Will the drug cause the adverse experience. 12/13/2015.", "width": "800" } 6 Temporal sequence Previous experience/Drug info Drug Level Alternative aetiological candidates Dechallenge/Rechallenge Plausibility Concomitant drugs Objective evidence Background epidemiological data Assigning Causality: Relevant criteria 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_6.jpg", "name": "Temporal sequence Previous experience/Drug info Drug Level Alternative aetiological candidates Dechallenge/Rechallenge Plausibility Concomitant drugs Objective evidence Background epidemiological data Assigning Causality: Relevant criteria 12/13/2015", "description": "Temporal sequence Previous experience/Drug info Drug Level Alternative aetiological candidates Dechallenge/Rechallenge Plausibility Concomitant drugs Objective evidence Background epidemiological data Assigning Causality: Relevant criteria 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 7 Decision based on the information 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_7.jpg", "name": "Decision based on the information 12/13/2015", "description": "Decision based on the information 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 8 Quantitative Estimate Confirmation: Experimental Study  APPROVe Thrombotic Events  Risk of thrombotic CV events after 18 months of Tx  Subgroup yses: Age, hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, aspirin use, cigarette smoking, Increased CV risk 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_8.jpg", "name": "Quantitative Estimate Confirmation: Experimental Study  APPROVe Thrombotic Events  Risk of thrombotic CV events after 18 months of Tx  Subgroup yses: Age, hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, aspirin use, cigarette smoking, Increased CV risk 12/13/2015", "description": "Quantitative Estimate Confirmation: Experimental Study  APPROVe Thrombotic Events  Risk of thrombotic CV events after 18 months of Tx  Subgroup yses: Age, hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, aspirin use, cigarette smoking, Increased CV risk 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 9 Overall Perspective……  Opinion of experts, clinical judgment or global introspection  Algorithm or standardized assessment method  Probabilistic or Bayesian approaches Expert expresses judgment: Considering all available data relevant to suspect ADR- Most widely used Advantages: Similar to clinical diagnosis Straight forward Easy to use Disadvantages: Poor reproducibility Inter & Intra rater disagreements No standardized evaluation Problem specific flowchart / decision table approach- Structured and standardized approach Advantages: Quick and simple to use Higher Inter & Intra rater reliability High degree of consistency and reproducibility Disadvantages: Lacks flexibility Inconsistent use of terminology Specific findings in a case to transform a prior into a posterior probability –Most logical method/ Gold standard Advantages: Open ended Highest reproducibility Disadvantages: Complex and extensive calculations Unavailability of requisite epidemiological data 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_9.jpg", "name": "Overall Perspective……  Opinion of experts, clinical judgment or global introspection  Algorithm or standardized assessment method  Probabilistic or Bayesian approaches Expert expresses judgment: Considering all available data relevant to suspect ADR- Most widely used Advantages: Similar to clinical diagnosis Straight forward Easy to use Disadvantages: Poor reproducibility Inter & Intra rater disagreements No standardized evaluation Problem specific flowchart / decision table approach- Structured and standardized approach Advantages: Quick and simple to use Higher Inter & Intra rater reliability High degree of consistency and reproducibility Disadvantages: Lacks flexibility Inconsistent use of terminology Specific findings in a case to transform a prior into a posterior probability –Most logical method/ Gold standard Advantages: Open ended Highest reproducibility Disadvantages: Complex and extensive calculations Unavailability of requisite epidemiological data 12/13/2015", "description": "Overall Perspective……  Opinion of experts, clinical judgment or global introspection  Algorithm or standardized assessment method  Probabilistic or Bayesian approaches Expert expresses judgment: Considering all available data relevant to suspect ADR- Most widely used Advantages: Similar to clinical diagnosis Straight forward Easy to use Disadvantages: Poor reproducibility Inter & Intra rater disagreements No standardized evaluation Problem specific flowchart / decision table approach- Structured and standardized approach Advantages: Quick and simple to use Higher Inter & Intra rater reliability High degree of consistency and reproducibility Disadvantages: Lacks flexibility Inconsistent use of terminology Specific findings in a case to transform a prior into a posterior probability –Most logical method/ Gold standard Advantages: Open ended Highest reproducibility Disadvantages: Complex and extensive calculations Unavailability of requisite epidemiological data 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 10 APPROACHES CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT Opinion of experts, clinical judgment or global introspection Algorithm or standardized assessment method Probabilistic or Bayesian approaches 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_10.jpg", "name": "APPROACHES CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT Opinion of experts, clinical judgment or global introspection Algorithm or standardized assessment method Probabilistic or Bayesian approaches 12/13/2015", "description": "APPROACHES CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT Opinion of experts, clinical judgment or global introspection Algorithm or standardized assessment method Probabilistic or Bayesian approaches 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 11 WHO SCALE OF CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT Certain Event or laboratory test abnormality, with plausible time relationship to drug intake Cannot be explained by disease or other drugs Response to withdrawal plausible (pharmacologically, pathologically) Event definitive pharmacologically or phenomenologically Rechallenge satisfactory, if necessary Probable /Likely Event or laboratory test abnormality, with reasonable time relationship to drug intake Unlikely to be attributed to disease or other drugs Response to withdrawal clinically reasonable Rechallenge not required Possible Event or laboratory test abnormality, with reasonable time relationship to drug intake Could also be explained by disease or other drugs Information on drug withdrawal may be unclear or lacking Unlikely Event or laboratory test abnormality, with a time to drug intake that makes a relationship improbable (but not impossible) Disease or other drugs provide plausible explanations Conditional / Unclassified Event or laboratory test abnormality More data for proper assessment needed Additional data under examination Unassessable / Unclassifiable Report suggesting an adverse reaction Cannot be judged because information is insufficient or contradictory Data cannot be supplemented or verified 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_11.jpg", "name": "WHO SCALE OF CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT Certain Event or laboratory test abnormality, with plausible time relationship to drug intake Cannot be explained by disease or other drugs Response to withdrawal plausible (pharmacologically, pathologically) Event definitive pharmacologically or phenomenologically Rechallenge satisfactory, if necessary Probable /Likely Event or laboratory test abnormality, with reasonable time relationship to drug intake Unlikely to be attributed to disease or other drugs Response to withdrawal clinically reasonable Rechallenge not required Possible Event or laboratory test abnormality, with reasonable time relationship to drug intake Could also be explained by disease or other drugs Information on drug withdrawal may be unclear or lacking Unlikely Event or laboratory test abnormality, with a time to drug intake that makes a relationship improbable (but not impossible) Disease or other drugs provide plausible explanations Conditional / Unclassified Event or laboratory test abnormality More data for proper assessment needed Additional data under examination Unassessable / Unclassifiable Report suggesting an adverse reaction Cannot be judged because information is insufficient or contradictory Data cannot be supplemented or verified 12/13/2015", "description": "WHO SCALE OF CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT Certain Event or laboratory test abnormality, with plausible time relationship to drug intake Cannot be explained by disease or other drugs Response to withdrawal plausible (pharmacologically, pathologically) Event definitive pharmacologically or phenomenologically Rechallenge satisfactory, if necessary Probable /Likely Event or laboratory test abnormality, with reasonable time relationship to drug intake Unlikely to be attributed to disease or other drugs Response to withdrawal clinically reasonable Rechallenge not required Possible Event or laboratory test abnormality, with reasonable time relationship to drug intake Could also be explained by disease or other drugs Information on drug withdrawal may be unclear or lacking Unlikely Event or laboratory test abnormality, with a time to drug intake that makes a relationship improbable (but not impossible) Disease or other drugs provide plausible explanations Conditional / Unclassified Event or laboratory test abnormality More data for proper assessment needed Additional data under examination Unassessable / Unclassifiable Report suggesting an adverse reaction Cannot be judged because information is insufficient or contradictory Data cannot be supplemented or verified 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 12 THE NARANJO ADR PROBABILITY SCALE QuestionsYesNoDon’t Know 1) Are there previous conclusive reports on this reaction? +100 2) Did the ADR appear after the suspected drug was administered? +20 3) Did the ADR improve when the drug was discontinued? +100 4) Did the ADR appear with re-challenge?+20 5) Are there alternative causes for the ADR?+20 6) Did the reaction appear when placebo was given?+10 7) Was the drug detected in blood at toxic levels?+100 8) Was the reaction more severe when the dose was increased, or less severe when the dose was decreased? +100 9) Did the patient have a similar reaction to the same or similar drug in any previous exposure? +100 10) Was the ADR confirmed by any objective evidence? +100 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_12.jpg", "name": "THE NARANJO ADR PROBABILITY SCALE QuestionsYesNoDon’t Know 1) Are there previous conclusive reports on this reaction.", "description": "+100 2) Did the ADR appear after the suspected drug was administered. +20 3) Did the ADR improve when the drug was discontinued. +100 4) Did the ADR appear with re-challenge +20 5) Are there alternative causes for the ADR +20 6) Did the reaction appear when placebo was given +10 7) Was the drug detected in blood at toxic levels +100 8) Was the reaction more severe when the dose was increased, or less severe when the dose was decreased. +100 9) Did the patient have a similar reaction to the same or similar drug in any previous exposure. +100 10) Was the ADR confirmed by any objective evidence. +100 12/13/2015.", "width": "800" } 13 What causality assessment can do Decrease disagreement between assessors Classify relationship likelihood (semi-quantitative) Mark individual case reports Education / improvement of scientific assessment What causality assessment cannot do Give accurate quantitative measurement of relationship likelihood Distinguish valid from invalid cases Prove the connection between drug and event Quantify the contribution of a drug to the development of an adverse event Change uncertainty into certainty 12/13/2015 { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_13.jpg", "name": "What causality assessment can do Decrease disagreement between assessors Classify relationship likelihood (semi-quantitative) Mark individual case reports Education / improvement of scientific assessment What causality assessment cannot do Give accurate quantitative measurement of relationship likelihood Distinguish valid from invalid cases Prove the connection between drug and event Quantify the contribution of a drug to the development of an adverse event Change uncertainty into certainty 12/13/2015", "description": "What causality assessment can do Decrease disagreement between assessors Classify relationship likelihood (semi-quantitative) Mark individual case reports Education / improvement of scientific assessment What causality assessment cannot do Give accurate quantitative measurement of relationship likelihood Distinguish valid from invalid cases Prove the connection between drug and event Quantify the contribution of a drug to the development of an adverse event Change uncertainty into certainty 12/13/2015", "width": "800" } 14 Questions? { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/26/8863056/slides/slide_14.jpg", "name": "Questions", "description": "Questions", "width": "800" } Ppt on campus area network Ppt on indian economic growth since 1990 Free ppt on articles in english grammar Ppt on enterprise resource planning Ppt on mauryan art and architecture Ppt on college website Ppt on rc phase shift oscillator circuit Ppt on bunking lectures Ppt on renewable energy in india Ppt on beer lambert law explained Clinical causality assessment I. Ralph Edwards R.H.B Meyboom.MCA Risk:benefit ysis of Kava-kava Update as at 12 Feb 2002.Signal identification and development I.Ralph Edwards.What pharmacovigilance can do for you! relationship assessment is a better concept 24 Nov Dar es Salaam.Good Pharmacovigilance PracticesChallenges in Causality Assessment in Spontaneous Reporting Systems Syed Rizwanuddin Ahmad, MD, MPH, FISPE, FCP 3 rd ICIUM, Antalya, Turkey November 2011.FDA Risk Management Workshop – Day #3 April 11, 2003 Robert C. Nelson, Ph.D. RCN Associates, Inc Annapolis, MD, USA.Postmarketing Risk Assessment of Drug Products Division of Drug Risk Evaluation Office of Drug Safety Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.ABCWINRisk and Statistics1 Risk and Statistics Risk Assessment in Clinical Decision Making Ulrich Mansmann Medical Statistics Branch University of Heidelberg.Causality Causality Hill’s Criteria Cross sectional studies.Department of Pharmacy, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital Suspect Moxifloxacin Induced Torsades de Pointes: A case report Ya-Wen.Causality Assessment in postmarketing adverse events Anshu Vashishtha MD PhD Watson Pharmaceuticals.EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE AND PHARMACY 1. Evidence-based medicine 2. Evidence-based pharmacy.CTD, Safety Tanja Braakman Genzyme Europe BV Pharmacovigilance Department.Deriving Biological Inferences From Epidemiologic Studies.EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :呂宥達 Date : 2005/10/27.EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE for BeginnersDIVISION OF REPRODUCTIVE AND UROLOGIC PRODUCTS Physician Labeling Rule Lisa Soule, M.D.Study Designs in EpidemiologicGuidance for Industry Establishing Pregnancy Registries Pregnancy Registry Working Group Pregnancy Labeling Taskforce March, 2000 Evelyn M. Rodriguez M.D., Similar presentations © 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.



Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details. Published on May 31, 2015 COMPILED VERSION OF MY PREVIOUS SLIDES... Be the first to comment LinkedIn Corporation © 2017Clipping is a handy way to collect and organize the most important slides from a presentation. You can keep your great finds in clipboards organized around topics.Looks like you’ve clipped this slide to already.





#Contact US #Terms of Use #Privacy Policy #Earnings Disclaimer