Presentation to Diane Litman's lab at the University of Pittsburgh about modeling and acquiring evidence for the Drug Interaction Knowledge Base (DIKB) project.
Acquiring and representing drug-drug interaction knowledge and evidence, Litman Lab, University of Pittsburgh, 2016-03-29
1. Acquiring and representing drug-
drug interaction
knowledge and evidence
Jodi Schneider
March 29, 2016
Litman Lab, CS, University of Pittsburgh
2. Problem
o Thousands of preventable medication errors occur
each year.
o Clinicians rely on information in drug compendia
(Physician’s Desk Reference, Medscape,
Micromedex, Epocrates, …).
o Compendia have information quality problems:
• differ significantly in their coverage, accuracy, and
agreement
• often fail to provide essential management
recommendations about prescription drugs
2
4. Prescribers consult drug interaction references
which are maintained by expert pharmacists.
Medscape EpocratesMicromedex 2.0
4
5. Prescribers consult drug interaction references
which are maintained by expert pharmacists.
Medscape EpocratesMicromedex 2.0
5
6. Problem
o Drug Compendia synthesize PDDI evidence into
knowledge claims but:
• Disagree on whether specific evidence items can support
or refute PDDI knowledge claims
7. Problem
o Drug Compendia synthesize PDDI evidence into
knowledge claims but:
• Disagree on whether specific evidence items can support
or refute PDDI knowledge claims
• May fail to include important evidence
9. Goals
o Long-term, provide drug compendia editors with
better information and better tools, to create the
information clinicians use.
o This talk focuses on how we might efficiently
acquire and represent
• knowledge claims about medication safety
• and their supporting evidence
o in a standard computable format.
11. Definitions
o Drug-drug interaction
• A biological process that results in a clinically
meaningful change to the response of at least one co-
administrated drug.
o Potential drug-drug interaction
• POSSIBILITY of a drug-drug interaction
• Data from a clinical/physiological study OR reasonable
extrapolation about drug-drug interaction mechanisms
11
12. Existing approaches: Representation
Bradford-Hill criteria (1965)
1. Strength
2. Consistency
3. Specificity
4. Temporality
5. Biological gradient
6. Plausibility
7. Coherence
Bradford-Hill A. The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation?.
Proc R Soc Med. 1965;58:295-300.
12
13. Existing approaches: Representation
Horn, J. R., Hansten, P. D., & Chan, L. N. (2007). Proposal for a new tool to evaluate
drug interaction cases. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 41(4), 674-680.
13
14. Existing approaches: Representation
Royal Dutch Association for the Advancement of
Pharmacy (2005)
1. Existence & quality of evidence on the interaction
2. Clinical relevance of the potential adverse reaction
resulting from the interaction
3. Risk factors identifying patient, medication or disease
characteristics for which the interaction is of special
importance
4. The incidence of the adverse reaction
Van Roon, E.N. et al: Clinical relevance of drug-drug interactions:
a structured assessment procedure. Drug Saf. 2005;28(12):1131-9.
14
18. Why is a new data model needed?
o Need computer integration
o Want a COMPUTABLE model that can make
inferences
18
19. Multiple layers of evidence
Medication Safety
Studies Layer
Clinical Studies and
Experiments
Scientific Evidence Layer
19
20. Scientific Evidence Layer: Micropublications
20
Clark, Ciccarese, Goble (2014) Micropublications: a semantic model for claims, evidence, arguments and
annotations in biomedical communications
34. Hand-extracting knowledge claims and
evidence
o Sources
• Primary research literature
• Case reports
• FDA-approved drug labels
o Process
• Spreadsheets
• PDF annotation
34
39. We are developing a search/retrieval portal
It will:
o Integrate information (removing silos)
o Offer the same information to all compendium
editors
o Provide direct access to information
• E.g. quotes in context
41. Evaluation plan for the search/retrieval portal
o 20-person user study
o Measures of
• Completeness of information
• Level of agreement
• Time required
• Perceived ease of use
42. Implications
o Implications for evidence modeling & curation
o Implications for ontology development.
o Implications for improving medication safety.
43. Implications for evidence modeling &
curation
o Evidence modeling & curation is a general process.
o Analogous processes could be used in other fields.
o Biomedical curation is most mature: structured
nature of the evidence interpretation, existing
ontologies, trained curators, information extraction
and natural language processing pipelines
o Curation pipelines need to be designed with
stakeholders in mind.
44. Thanks to collaborators & funders
o Training grant T15LM007059 from the National
Library of Medicine and the National Institute of
Dental and Craniofacial Research
o The entire “Addressing gaps in clinically useful
evidence on drug-drug interactions” team from U.S.
National Library of Medicine R01 grant
(PI, Richard Boyce; R01LM011838) and other
collaborators
44
45. “Addressing gaps in clinically useful
evidence on drug-drug interactions”
4-year project, U.S. National Library of Medicine R01
grant
(PI, Richard Boyce; R01LM011838)
o Evidence panel of domain experts: Carol Collins,
Amy Grizzle, Lisa Hines, John R Horn, Phil Empey,
Dan Malone
o Informaticists: Jodi Schneider, Harry Hochheiser,
Katrina Romagnoli, Samuel Rosko
o Ontologists: Mathias Brochhausen, Bill Hogan
o Programmers: Yifan Ning, Wen Zhang, Louisa
Zhang
45
46. Jodi Schneider, Mathias Brochhausen, Samuel Rosko, Paolo Ciccarese,
William R. Hogan, Daniel Malone, Yifan Ning, Tim Clark and Richard D.
Boyce. “Formalizing knowledge and evidence about potential drug-drug
interactions.” International Workshop on Biomedical Data Mining, Modeling,
and Semantic Integration: A Promising Approach to Solving Unmet Medical
Needs (BDM2I 2015) at ISWC 2015 Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, USA.
Jodi Schneider, Paolo Ciccarese, Tim Clark and Richard D. Boyce. “Using the
Micropublications ontology and the Open Annotation Data Model to represent
evidence within a drug-drug interaction knowledge base.” 4th Workshop on
Linked Science 2014—Making Sense Out of Data (LISC2014) at ISWC 2014
Riva de Garda, Italy.
Mathias Brochhausen, Jodi Schneider, Daniel Malone, Philip E. Empey,
William R. Hogan and Richard D. Boyce “Towards a foundational
representation of potential drug-drug interaction knowledge.” First
International Workshop on Drug Interaction Knowledge Representation
(DIKR-2014) at the International Conference on Biomedical Ontologies (ICBO
2014) Houston, Texas, USA.
Richard D. Boyce, John Horn, Oktie Hassanzadeh, Anita de Waard, Jodi
Schneider, Joanne S. Luciano, Majid Rastegar-Mojarad, Maria Liakata,
“Dynamic Enhancement of Drug Product Labels to Support Drug Safety,
Efficacy, and Effectiveness.” Journal of Biomedical Semantics. 4(5), 2013.
doi:10.1186/2041-1480-4-5
47.
48. o Evidence
48
7.19 Drugs Metabolized by Cytochrome P4502D6
In vitro studies did not reveal an inhibitory effect of
escitalopram on CYP2D6.
Notas do Editor
Abstract:
Limitations in the information available to clinicians are a contributing factor to the many thousands of preventable medication errors that occur each year. Current knowledge sources about potential drug-drug interactions (PDDIs) often fail to provide essential management recommendations and differ significantly in their coverage, accuracy, and agreement. To address this, we seek to more efficiently acquire and represent PDDIs knowledge claims and their supporting evidence in a standard computable format.
In this talk we will present work in progress on both representation (a data model) and acquisition (an evidence curation pipeline). Our data model has a reusable generic layer, provided by the Micropublications Ontology, as well as a domain-specific layer represented using the new Drug-drug Interaction and Drug-drug Interaction Evidence Ontology (DIDEO). We will discuss the motivation for our approach and possible implications for representing evidence from other biomedical domains. On the curation side, we will describe how our research team is hand-extracting knowledge claims and evidence from the primary research literature, case reports, and FDA-approved drug labels. This work has implications for ontology development, the design of curation pipelines, and for improving medication safety.
Adverse drug events are a leading cause of death
Image from https://www.njpharmacy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/drug-interactions-checker.png
Image from http://www.clipartbest.com/clipart-McLLpbGKi
Adverse drug events are a leading cause of death
Images from
http://www.knowabouthealth.com/android-version-of-medscape-app-ready-to-download/7568/
Android Play store
http://amazingsgs.blogspot.com/2011/10/top-5-free-android-medical-apps-for.html
Drug Compendia synthesize PDDI evidence into knowledge claims but
May fail to include important evidence
Disagree if specific evidence items can support or refute PDDI knowledge claims
Most sources of clinically-oriented PDDI knowledge disagree substantially in their content,
including about which drug combinations should never be never co-administered. For
example, only one quarter of 59 contraindicated drug pairs were listed in three PDDI
information sources[4], only 18 (28%) of 64 pharmacy information and clinical decisions
support systems correctly identified 13 PDDIs considered clinically significant
by a team of drug interaction experts[5], and four clinically oriented drug information
compendia agreed on only 2.2% of 406 PDDIs considered to be “major” by at least
one source[6].
From our paper: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1309/paper2.pdf
4. Wang, L.M., Wong, M., Lightwood, J.M., Cheng, C.M.: Black box
warning contraindicated comedications: concordance among three
major drug interaction screening programs. Ann. Pharmacother. 44,
28–34 (2010).
5. Saverno, K.R., Hines, L.E., Warholak, T.L., Grizzle, A.J., Babits, L.,
Clark, C., Taylor, A.M., Malone, D.C.: Ability of pharmacy clinical
decision-support software to alert users about clinically important
drug-drug interactions. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. JAMIA. 18, 32–
37 (2011).
6. Abarca, J., Malone, D.C., Armstrong, E.P., Grizzle, A.J., Hansten,
P.D., Van Bergen, R.C., Lipton, R.B.: Concordance of severity ratings
provided in four drug interaction compendia. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc.
JAPhA. 44, 136–141 (2004).
Adverse drug events are a leading cause of death
Images from
http://www.knowabouthealth.com/android-version-of-medscape-app-ready-to-download/7568/
Android Play store
http://amazingsgs.blogspot.com/2011/10/top-5-free-android-medical-apps-for.html
Animation here
Product labeling is incomplete
Search strategy
No standard way of searching/assessing the evidence
By reducing the variability in searching (more standardize)
(others working on standardizing assessing evidence)
No standard way to synthesize
DIDEO:
A potential drug-drug interaction (PDDI) is an information content entity that specifies the possibility of a drug-drug interaction based on either reasonable extrapolation about drug-drug interaction mechanisms or a data item created by clinical studies, clinical observation or physiological experiment.
Implementation/specification of Bradford-Hill to DDIs/PDDIs
1. Are there previous credible reports of this interaction in humans?2. Is the observed interaction consistent with the known interactive properties of precipitant drug?3. Is the observed interaction consistent with the known interactive properties of object drug?4. Is the event consistent with the known or reasonable time course of the interaction (onset and/or offset)?
5. Did the interaction remit upon dechallenge of the precipitant drug with no change in the object drug? (if no dechallenge, use Unknown or NA and skip Question 6)
6. Did the interaction reappear when the precipitant drug was readministered in the presence of continued use of object drug?
7. Are there reasonable alternative causes for the event?a8. Was the object drug detected in the blood or other fluids in concentrations consistent with the proposed interaction?9. Was the drug interaction confirmed by any objective evidence consistent with the effects on the object drug (other than drug concentrations from question 8)?10. Was the interaction greater when the precipitant drug dose was increased or less when the precipitant drug dose was decreased?
From http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/fda/fdaDrugXsl.cfm?setid=13bb8267-1cab-43e5-acae-55a4d957630a&type=display
From http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/fda/fdaDrugXsl.cfm?setid=13bb8267-1cab-43e5-acae-55a4d957630a&type=display
Evidence entry form from:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkZGlrcmFuZGlyfGd4OjE0ZGIwY2IwNzJhOWNjMjY