Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations

Abstract Background Regulatory agencies, such as the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada, are requiring the public sharing of clinical trial reports that are used to make drug approval decisions. Both agencies have provided guidance for the quantitative anonymization of these clinical report...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Janice Branson, Nathan Good, Jung-Wei Chen, Will Monge, Christian Probst, Khaled El Emam
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-02-01
Series:Trials
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-020-4120-y
_version_ 1828473945638043648
author Janice Branson
Nathan Good
Jung-Wei Chen
Will Monge
Christian Probst
Khaled El Emam
author_facet Janice Branson
Nathan Good
Jung-Wei Chen
Will Monge
Christian Probst
Khaled El Emam
author_sort Janice Branson
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Regulatory agencies, such as the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada, are requiring the public sharing of clinical trial reports that are used to make drug approval decisions. Both agencies have provided guidance for the quantitative anonymization of these clinical reports before they are shared. There is limited empirical information on the effectiveness of this approach in protecting patient privacy for clinical trial data. Methods In this paper we empirically test the hypothesis that when these guidelines are implemented in practice, they provide adequate privacy protection to patients. An anonymized clinical study report for a trial on a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that is sold as a prescription eye drop was subjected to re-identification. The target was 500 patients in the USA. Only suspected matches to real identities were reported. Results Six suspected matches with low confidence scores were identified. Each suspected match took 24.2 h of effort. Social media and death records provided the most useful information for getting the suspected matches. Conclusions These results suggest that the anonymization guidance from these agencies can provide adequate privacy protection for patients, and the modes of attack can inform further refinements of the methodologies they recommend in their guidance for manufacturers.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T05:52:19Z
format Article
id doaj.art-6d490da0c4d6469fb091a7689f4cb71f
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1745-6215
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T05:52:19Z
publishDate 2020-02-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Trials
spelling doaj.art-6d490da0c4d6469fb091a7689f4cb71f2022-12-22T01:18:47ZengBMCTrials1745-62152020-02-012111910.1186/s13063-020-4120-yEvaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada RegulationsJanice Branson0Nathan Good1Jung-Wei Chen2Will Monge3Christian Probst4Khaled El Emam5NovartisGood ResearchGood ResearchGood ResearchPrivacy AnalyticsPrivacy AnalyticsAbstract Background Regulatory agencies, such as the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada, are requiring the public sharing of clinical trial reports that are used to make drug approval decisions. Both agencies have provided guidance for the quantitative anonymization of these clinical reports before they are shared. There is limited empirical information on the effectiveness of this approach in protecting patient privacy for clinical trial data. Methods In this paper we empirically test the hypothesis that when these guidelines are implemented in practice, they provide adequate privacy protection to patients. An anonymized clinical study report for a trial on a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that is sold as a prescription eye drop was subjected to re-identification. The target was 500 patients in the USA. Only suspected matches to real identities were reported. Results Six suspected matches with low confidence scores were identified. Each suspected match took 24.2 h of effort. Social media and death records provided the most useful information for getting the suspected matches. Conclusions These results suggest that the anonymization guidance from these agencies can provide adequate privacy protection for patients, and the modes of attack can inform further refinements of the methodologies they recommend in their guidance for manufacturers.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-020-4120-y
spellingShingle Janice Branson
Nathan Good
Jung-Wei Chen
Will Monge
Christian Probst
Khaled El Emam
Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations
Trials
title Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations
title_full Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations
title_fullStr Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations
title_short Evaluating the re-identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under EMA Policy 0070 and Health Canada Regulations
title_sort evaluating the re identification risk of a clinical study report anonymized under ema policy 0070 and health canada regulations
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13063-020-4120-y
work_keys_str_mv AT janicebranson evaluatingthereidentificationriskofaclinicalstudyreportanonymizedunderemapolicy0070andhealthcanadaregulations
AT nathangood evaluatingthereidentificationriskofaclinicalstudyreportanonymizedunderemapolicy0070andhealthcanadaregulations
AT jungweichen evaluatingthereidentificationriskofaclinicalstudyreportanonymizedunderemapolicy0070andhealthcanadaregulations
AT willmonge evaluatingthereidentificationriskofaclinicalstudyreportanonymizedunderemapolicy0070andhealthcanadaregulations
AT christianprobst evaluatingthereidentificationriskofaclinicalstudyreportanonymizedunderemapolicy0070andhealthcanadaregulations
AT khaledelemam evaluatingthereidentificationriskofaclinicalstudyreportanonymizedunderemapolicy0070andhealthcanadaregulations