Efficacy and safety of paricalcitol in patients undergoing hemodialysis: a meta-analysis

Mining Real-World Big Data to Characterize Adverse Drug Reaction Quantitatively: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs), which are the phenotypic manifestations of clinical drug toxicity in humans, are a major concern in precision clinical medicine. A comprehensive evaluation of ADRs is helpful for unbiased supervision of marketed drugs and for discovering new drugs with high success rates.

OBJECTIVE

In current practice, drug safety evaluation is often oversimplified to the occurrence or nonoccurrence of ADRs. Given the limitations of current qualitative methods, there is an urgent need for a quantitative evaluation model to improve pharmacovigilance and the accurate assessment of drug safety.

METHODS

In this study, we developed a mathematical model, namely the Adverse Drug Reaction Classification System (ADReCS) severity-grading model, for the quantitative characterization of ADR severity, a crucial feature for evaluating the impact of ADRs on human health. The model was constructed by mining millions of real-world historical adverse drug event reports. A new parameter called Severity_score was introduced to measure the severity of ADRs, and upper and lower score boundaries were determined for 5 severity grades.

RESULTS

The ADReCS severity-grading model exhibited excellent consistency (99.22%) with the expert-grading system, the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Hence, we graded the severity of 6277 standard ADRs for 129,407 drug-ADR pairs. Moreover, we calculated the occurrence rates of 6272 distinct ADRs for 127,763 drug-ADR pairs in large patient populations by mining real-world medication prescriptions. With the quantitative features, we demonstrated example applications in systematically elucidating ADR mechanisms and thereby discovered a list of drugs with improper dosages.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, this study represents the first comprehensive determination of both ADR severity grades and ADR frequencies. This endeavor establishes a strong foundation for future artificial intelligence applications in discovering new drugs with high efficacy and low toxicity. It also heralds a paradigm shift in clinical toxicity research, moving from qualitative description to quantitative evaluation.

A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials

Paricalcitol, a new vitamin D receptor activator (VDRA), is reported to be more effective than other VDRAs in reducing calcium and phosphorus levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol remain controversial. This analysis compares paricalcitol with other VDRAs in patients undergoing hemodialysis. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CNKI up to April 22, 2019. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values were estimated to compare the outcomes of the groups. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures of RevMan 5.2 and Stata 12.0. Fifteen studies (N = 110,544) were included in this meta-analysis. Of these studies, 11 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 were non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs). Patients receiving paricalcitol experienced better overall survival (OS) than patients receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.80–0.91; P < 0.00001). Intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) levels were significantly reduced in the paricalcitol group compared to the group receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled SMD of -0.53 (95% CI -0.89– -0.16; P = 0.004). There was a significant increase in serum calcium levels from baseline in the paricalcitol group compared to the other VDRAs group when limiting the analysis to RCTs, with a pooled SMD of 2.14 (95% CI 0.90–3.38; P = 0.0007). Changes in serum calcium levels were significantly lower in the paricalcitol group when the analysis was limited to NRSIs, with a pooled SMD of -0.85 (95% CI -1.34–-0.35; P = 0.0008). The NSRI analysis also showed a significant reduction in serum phosphorus levels in the paricalcitol group, with a pooled SMD of -0.57 (95% CI -1.00–-0.13; P = 0.01). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of hypercalcemia, hyperphosphatemia, or adverse events. Generally, paricalcitol seems superior to other VDRAs in reducing mortality and iPTH levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the comparative effectiveness of paricalcitol in reducing serum calcium and phosphorus levels needs further exploration. No significant difference was found in the rate of adverse events.