接受抗结核和/或抗逆转录病毒治疗的艾滋病病毒感染者的肝损伤--使用最新的 Roussel Uclaf 因果关系评估法评估因果关系。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1002/pds.5883
H M Gunter, G Tatz, G Maartens, C W Spearman, U Mehta, K Cohen
{"title":"接受抗结核和/或抗逆转录病毒治疗的艾滋病病毒感染者的肝损伤--使用最新的 Roussel Uclaf 因果关系评估法评估因果关系。","authors":"H M Gunter, G Tatz, G Maartens, C W Spearman, U Mehta, K Cohen","doi":"10.1002/pds.5883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We compared performance of the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) with multidisciplinary expert panel review in identifying a drug-induced liver injury (DILI) due to antituberculosis therapy (ATT) and/or antiretroviral therapy (ART).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cases were drawn from a prospective registry of hospitalised adults with suspected DILI due to ATT and/or ART in Cape Town, South Africa. Participants had to fulfil American Thoracic Society criteria for ATT interruption (alanine transaminase [ALT] ≥5 times upper limit of normal [ULN]/ALT ≥3 times [ULN] and symptomatic). Causality assessment by expert panel review served as reference standard. The panel ranked potentially implicated drugs as certain, probable, possible or unlikely causes guided by World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre criteria. The RUCAM was performed for each potentially implicated drug. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of the RUCAM in identifying a probable/certain drug cause for liver injury.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 48 participants. All were people with HIV (PWH). Twenty-seven were on concomitant ART and ATT, with a median of six potentially hepatotoxic drugs per case. Sensitivity and specificity of the RUCAM in identifying a probable/certain drug cause of liver injury compared with expert panel review was 7% and 100% respectively. Implicated drugs (times ranked probable/certain by panel) were isoniazid (18/0), pyrazinamide (17/0), rifampicin (15/1), efavirenz (6/4) and lopinavir/ritonavir (1/0).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PWH with liver injury received multiple potentially implicated drugs, which may increase liver injury risk and complicate causality assessment. Compared with expert panel review, the RUCAM had low sensitivity in detecting probable or certain drug causes of liver injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 10","pages":"e5883"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Liver Injury in People With HIV on Antituberculosis and/or Antiretroviral Therapy-Assessing Causality Using the Updated Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method.\",\"authors\":\"H M Gunter, G Tatz, G Maartens, C W Spearman, U Mehta, K Cohen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.5883\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We compared performance of the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) with multidisciplinary expert panel review in identifying a drug-induced liver injury (DILI) due to antituberculosis therapy (ATT) and/or antiretroviral therapy (ART).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cases were drawn from a prospective registry of hospitalised adults with suspected DILI due to ATT and/or ART in Cape Town, South Africa. Participants had to fulfil American Thoracic Society criteria for ATT interruption (alanine transaminase [ALT] ≥5 times upper limit of normal [ULN]/ALT ≥3 times [ULN] and symptomatic). Causality assessment by expert panel review served as reference standard. The panel ranked potentially implicated drugs as certain, probable, possible or unlikely causes guided by World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre criteria. The RUCAM was performed for each potentially implicated drug. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of the RUCAM in identifying a probable/certain drug cause for liver injury.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 48 participants. All were people with HIV (PWH). Twenty-seven were on concomitant ART and ATT, with a median of six potentially hepatotoxic drugs per case. Sensitivity and specificity of the RUCAM in identifying a probable/certain drug cause of liver injury compared with expert panel review was 7% and 100% respectively. Implicated drugs (times ranked probable/certain by panel) were isoniazid (18/0), pyrazinamide (17/0), rifampicin (15/1), efavirenz (6/4) and lopinavir/ritonavir (1/0).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PWH with liver injury received multiple potentially implicated drugs, which may increase liver injury risk and complicate causality assessment. Compared with expert panel review, the RUCAM had low sensitivity in detecting probable or certain drug causes of liver injury.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"33 10\",\"pages\":\"e5883\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5883\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5883","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们比较了罗塞尔-乌克拉夫因果关系评估法(RUCAM)和多学科专家小组审查法在识别抗结核治疗和/或抗逆转录病毒治疗引起的药物性肝损伤(DILI)方面的性能:病例来自南非开普敦的一个前瞻性登记处,该登记处登记了疑似因 ATT 和/或 ART 而导致 DILI 的住院成人病例。参与者必须符合美国胸科学会关于ATT中断的标准(丙氨酸转氨酶[ALT]≥5倍正常值上限[ULN]/ALT≥3倍[ULN]且有症状)。专家组审查的因果关系评估作为参考标准。专家组根据世界卫生组织乌普萨拉监测中心的标准,将可能涉及的药物分为确定、可能、可能或不可能的原因。对每种可能涉及的药物都进行了 RUCAM 分析。我们计算了 RUCAM 在确定肝损伤的可能/确定药物原因方面的敏感性和特异性:我们共纳入了 48 名参与者。所有参与者均为艾滋病病毒感染者(PWH)。其中 27 人同时服用抗逆转录病毒疗法和抗逆转录病毒药物,每个病例的潜在肝毒性药物中位数为 6 种。与专家组审查相比,RUCAM 在确定可能/确定的肝损伤药物原因方面的灵敏度和特异性分别为 7% 和 100%。涉及的药物(专家组评定为可能/确定的次数)为异烟肼(18/0)、吡嗪酰胺(17/0)、利福平(15/1)、依非韦伦(6/4)和洛匹那韦/利托那韦(1/0):结论:肝损伤的 PWH 服用了多种可能涉及的药物,这可能会增加肝损伤风险并使因果关系评估复杂化。与专家组审查相比,RUCAM在检测肝损伤的可能或确定药物原因方面灵敏度较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Liver Injury in People With HIV on Antituberculosis and/or Antiretroviral Therapy-Assessing Causality Using the Updated Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method.

Purpose: We compared performance of the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) with multidisciplinary expert panel review in identifying a drug-induced liver injury (DILI) due to antituberculosis therapy (ATT) and/or antiretroviral therapy (ART).

Methods: Cases were drawn from a prospective registry of hospitalised adults with suspected DILI due to ATT and/or ART in Cape Town, South Africa. Participants had to fulfil American Thoracic Society criteria for ATT interruption (alanine transaminase [ALT] ≥5 times upper limit of normal [ULN]/ALT ≥3 times [ULN] and symptomatic). Causality assessment by expert panel review served as reference standard. The panel ranked potentially implicated drugs as certain, probable, possible or unlikely causes guided by World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre criteria. The RUCAM was performed for each potentially implicated drug. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of the RUCAM in identifying a probable/certain drug cause for liver injury.

Results: We included 48 participants. All were people with HIV (PWH). Twenty-seven were on concomitant ART and ATT, with a median of six potentially hepatotoxic drugs per case. Sensitivity and specificity of the RUCAM in identifying a probable/certain drug cause of liver injury compared with expert panel review was 7% and 100% respectively. Implicated drugs (times ranked probable/certain by panel) were isoniazid (18/0), pyrazinamide (17/0), rifampicin (15/1), efavirenz (6/4) and lopinavir/ritonavir (1/0).

Conclusions: PWH with liver injury received multiple potentially implicated drugs, which may increase liver injury risk and complicate causality assessment. Compared with expert panel review, the RUCAM had low sensitivity in detecting probable or certain drug causes of liver injury.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
期刊最新文献
Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: Time-To-Event Analysis Approaches in Pharmacoepidemiology. Hydrochlorothiazide Use and Risk of Skin Cancer: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study. The Oncology QCARD Initiative: Fostering efficient evaluation of initial real-world data proposals. Validation Study of the Claims-Based Algorithm Using the International Classification of Diseases Codes to Identify Patients With Coronavirus Disease in Japan From 2020 to 2022: The VENUS Study. A Validated Algorithm to Identify Hepatic Decompensation in the Veterans Health Administration Electronic Health Record System.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1