Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Contemp Clin Trials. 2008 Mar 5;29(5):635–645. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2008.02.004

Table I.

Comparison of Selected Features

Criterion MedDRA (ratings in grey borrowed from Bousquet et al.) [22] SNOMED CT CTCAE, v.3
Selected Terminology Desiderata[19]
Vocabulary content – comprehensive for AE domain; should include signs, symptoms, lab values, diseases and disorders. E E F
Concept orientation E E F
Concept orientation E E E
Concept permanence E E E
Non-semantic concept identifiers E E E
Polyhierarchy P E N/A
Formal definitions N E N
Rejection of ‘not elsewhere classified terms’ N N N
Multiple granularities F E N/A
Multiple consistent views P E N
Context representation P F P
Graceful evolution E E E
Recognized redundancy N F/P N
Coding system type terminology terminology classification
  Post-coordination no yes N/A
Incorporated in UMLS yes yes yes
Designed specifically for representing AEs yes no yes
Scope AEs, PE findings, Medical History Clinical findings Toxicities
Global acceptance for AE reporting (i.e., ICH) yes no no
FDA acceptance yes Yes for SPL; no for AE no
Mappings to other possible standards yes yes some
Free or low-cost use – US Users no yes yes
Free or low-cost use – International Users no some yes
Already in-use for Pharmaceutical Companies yes no some
“Human readable” concept definitions no no yes
Established rules for assigning codes yes some yes
Training & Guidance Resources exist E P E
Training & Guidance Resources are affordable/accessible fee fee free
Previous/Demonstrated Organizational Experience in Adverse Events yes no yes
Explicit Severity Grading no no yes

E=Excellent, F=Fair, P=Poor, N=None; N/A = Not applicable