Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Jun 20;28(18):3002-7.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.27.4282. Epub 2010 May 17.

Evaluation of the value of attribution in the interpretation of adverse event data: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group investigation

Shauna L Hillman  1 , Sumithra J Mandrekar, Brian Bot, Ronald P DeMatteo, Edith A Perez, Karla V Ballman, Heidi Nelson, Jan C Buckner, Daniel J Sargent
Affiliations

Evaluation of the value of attribution in the interpretation of adverse event data: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group investigation

Shauna L Hillman et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Purpose: In March 1998, Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) version 2.0 introduced the collection of attribution of adverse events (AEs) to study drug. We investigate whether attribution adds value to the interpretation of AE data.

Patients and methods: Patients in the placebo arm of two phase III trials-North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial 97-24-51 (carboxyamino-triazole v placebo in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer) and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z9001 (imatinib mesylate v placebo after resection of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors)-were studied. Attribution was categorized as unrelated (not related or unlikely) and related (possible, probable, or definite).

Results: In total, 398 patients (84 from Trial 97-24-51 and 314 from Trial Z9001) and 7,736 AEs were included; 47% and 50% of the placebo-arm AEs, respectively, were reported as related. When the same AE was reported in the same patient on multiple visits, the attribution category changed at least once 36% and 31% of the time. AE type and sex (Trial Z9001) and AE type and performance status (Trial 97-24-51) were associated with a higher likelihood of AEs being deemed related.

Conclusion: Nearly 50% of AEs were reported as attributed to study drug on the placebo arm of two randomized clinical trials. These data provide strong evidence that AE attribution is difficult to determine, unreliable, and of questionable value in interpreting AE data in randomized clinical trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
Distribution of attribution by trial.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Figueiras A, Tato F, Fontaiñas J, et al. Influence of physicians' attitudes on reporting adverse drug events. Med Care. 1999;37:809–814. - PubMed
    1. Thomas EJ, Lipsitz SR, Studdert DM, et al. The reliability of medical record review for estimating adverse event rates. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:812–816. - PubMed
    1. Rothenberg ML, Meropol NJ, Poplin EA, et al. Mortality associated with irinotecan plus bolus fluorouracil/leucovorin: Summary findings of an independent panel. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3801–3807. - PubMed
    1. Barsky AJ, Saintfort R, Rogers MP, et al. Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA. 2002;287:622–627. - PubMed
    1. Rosenzweig P, Brohier S, Zipfel A. The placebo effect in healthy volunteers: Influence of experimental conditions on the adverse events profile during phase I studies. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1993;54:578–583. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms