Recognizing drug-induced liver injury: Current problems, possible solutions

被引:136
作者
Lee, WM
Senior, JR
机构
[1] US FDA, Off Pharmacoepidemiol & Stat Sci, Ctr Drug Evaluat & Res, Rockville, MD 20857 USA
[2] Univ Texas, SW Med Ctr, Dept Internal Med, Dallas, TX 75390 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
causality attribution; diagnosis of exclusion; information required; true incidence; risk factors; prospective safety study; hepatotoxicity mechanisms;
D O I
10.1080/01926230590522356
中图分类号
R36 [病理学];
学科分类号
100104 ;
摘要
Currently there are three major problems in understanding drug-induced liver injury (DILI): (1) reliably establishing whether the liver disease was caused by the drug, or by another process: (2) determining the true incidence of and clinical risk factors for drug-induced hepatotoxicity; and (3) elaborating the mechanisms by which injury occurs to hepatocytes and other liver cells. We have focused here on the first two problems, as issues that may be amenable to actions in the near future, but the third may take substantially longer to work out. The first problem requires sufficient information for medical differential diagnosis. There are no pathognomonic indicators of DILI; even liver biopsy is not diagnostic. Making the correct attribution of causality requires analyzing the temporal relationship of drug exposure to illness and excluding all other possible causes. The second problem, determining incidence, cannot be done entirely adequately using Currently available methods, whether by clinical trials, by spontaneous adverse event reports, or by retrospective epidemiologic studies. There is need for prospective safety studies to establish the true incidence of DILI caused by a drug, to identify risk factors for it, and to collect biologic materials for analytic studies toward better understanding mechanisms of DILI.
引用
收藏
页码:155 / 164
页数:10
相关论文
共 51 条
  • [1] Adverse drug event monitoring at the Food and Drug Administration - Your report can make a difference
    Ahmad, SR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2003, 18 (01) : 57 - 60
  • [2] Clinical diagnostic scale: a useful tool in the evaluation of suspected hepatotoxic adverse drug reactions
    Aithal, GP
    Rawlins, MD
    Day, CP
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEPATOLOGY, 2000, 33 (06) : 949 - 952
  • [3] Disproportionality analysis using empirical Bayes data mining: a tool for the evaluation of drug interactions in the post-marketing setting
    Almenoff, JS
    DuMouchel, W
    Kindman, LA
    Yang, XH
    Fram, D
    [J]. PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2003, 12 (06) : 517 - 521
  • [4] How safe is the safety paradigm?
    Arah, OA
    Klazinga, NS
    [J]. QUALITY & SAFETY IN HEALTH CARE, 2004, 13 (03): : 226 - 232
  • [5] DOES PROOF OF CAUSALITY EVER EXIST IN PHARMACOVIGILANCE
    AURICHE, M
    LOUPI, E
    [J]. DRUG SAFETY, 1993, 9 (03) : 230 - 235
  • [6] Rates of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions in France
    Bégaud, B
    Martin, K
    Haramburu, F
    Moore, N
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2002, 288 (13): : 1588 - 1588
  • [7] CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT OF ADVERSE REACTIONS TO DRUGS .2. AN ORIGINAL MODEL FOR VALIDATION OF DRUG CAUSALITY ASSESSMENT METHODS - CASE-REPORTS WITH POSITIVE RECHALLENGE
    BENICHOU, C
    DANAN, G
    FLAHAULT, A
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1993, 46 (11) : 1331 - 1336
  • [8] BENICHOU C, 1990, J HEPATOL, V11, P272
  • [9] BENICHOU C, 1989, DRUG INF J, V23, P71
  • [10] Bilker WB, 1999, STAT MED, V18, P3021, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19991130)18:22<3021::AID-SIM242>3.3.CO