Rhekiss-The German Register for Child Wish and Pregnancies in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases.

In pharmacoepidemiology, robust data are needed to judge the impact of drug treatment on pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes and breast-fed infants. As pregnant and breastfeeding women are usually excluded from randomised clinical trials, observational studies are required. One of those data sources are pregnancy registers specifically developed to focus on certain diseases or disease groups. The German Rhekiss register investigates pregnancies in women with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD). Rhekiss is a nationwide, multicentre, longitudinal study, in which women aged 18 years or older with an underlying IRD can be enrolled by a rheumatologist either when planning a pregnancy or in the first half of pregnancy. Data are collected prospectively at regular follow-up visits. Rheumatologists and patients provide information in a web-based system before conception (if enrolment was at the time of pregnancy planning), during and after pregnancy. A smartphone app is available for patients. Maternal and clinical information, general laboratory markers, treatment with antirheumatic and other drugs, adverse events, items related to course and outcome of pregnancy and the health of the child are uniformly assessed for all diseases. Individual information on the IRD includes classification criteria, diagnosis-specific laboratory parameters, clinical parameters and validated instruments to measure disease activity or damage. Furthermore, patient-reported outcome measures are captured. A total of 2013 individual patients have been enrolled in the register, and data on 1801 completed pregnancies are available. In summary, Rhekiss is a comprehensive and complex register that can answer various research questions about pregnancy in women with chronic IRDs.

Metadata for Data dIscoverability aNd Study rEplicability in obseRVAtional Studies (MINERVA): Development and Pilot of a Metadata List and Catalogue in Europe.

PURPOSE: Metadata for data dIscoverability aNd study rEplicability in obseRVAtional studies (MINERVA), a European Medicines Agency-funded project (EUPAS39322), defined a set of metadata to describe real-world data sources (RWDSs) and piloted metadata collection in a prototype catalogue to assist investigators from data source discoverability through study conduct. METHODS: A list of metadata was created from a review of existing metadata catalogues and recommendations, structured interviews, a stakeholder survey, and a technical workshop. The prototype was designed to comply with the FAIR principles (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable), using MOLGENIS software. Metadata collection was piloted by 15 data access partners (DAPs) from across Europe. RESULTS: A total of 442 metadata variables were defined in six domains: institutions (organizations connected to a data source); data banks (data collections sustained by an organization); data sources (collections of linkable data banks covering a common underlying population); studies; networks (of institutions); and common data models (CDMs). A total of 26 institutions were recorded in the prototype. Each DAP populated the metadata of one data source and its selected data banks. The number of data banks varied by data source; the most common data banks were hospital administrative records and pharmacy dispensation records (10 data sources each). Quantitative metadata were successfully extracted from three data sources conforming to different CDMs and entered into the prototype. CONCLUSIONS: A metadata list was finalized, a prototype was successfully populated, and a good practice guide was developed. Setting up and maintaining a metadata catalogue on RWDSs will require substantial effort to support discoverability of data sources and reproducibility of studies in Europe.

The Medicines Intelligence Data Platform: A Population-Based Data Resource From New South Wales, Australia.

BACKGROUND: The Medicines Intelligence (MedIntel) Data Platform is an anonymised linked data resource designed to generate real-world evidence on prescribed medicine use, effectiveness, safety, costs and cost-effectiveness in Australia. RESULTS: The platform comprises Medicare-eligible people who are ≥18 years and residing in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, any time during 2005-2020, with linked administrative data on dispensed prescription medicines (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme), health service use (Medicare Benefits Schedule), emergency department visits (NSW Emergency Department Data Collection), hospitalisations (NSW Admitted Patient Data Collection) plus death (National Death Index) and cancer registrations (NSW Cancer Registry). Data are currently available to 2022, with approval to update the cohort and data collections annually. The platform includes 7.4 million unique people across all years, covering 36.9% of the Australian adult population; the overall population increased from 4.8 M in 2005 to 6.0 M in 2020. As of 1 January 2019 (the last pre-pandemic year), the cohort had a mean age of 48.7 years (51.1% female), with most people (4.4 M, 74.7%) residing in a major city. In 2019, 4.4 M people (73.3%) were dispensed a medicine, 1.2 M (20.5%) were hospitalised, 5.3 M (89.4%) had a GP or specialist appointment, and 54 003 people died. Anti-infectives were the most prevalent medicines dispensed to the cohort in 2019 (43.1%), followed by nervous system (32.2%) and cardiovascular system medicines (30.2%). CONCLUSION: The MedIntel Data Platform creates opportunities for national and international research collaborations and enables us to address contemporary clinically- and policy-relevant research questions about quality use of medicines and health outcomes in Australia and globally.

Assessing the Benefits and Harms of Pharmacotherapy in Older Adults with Frailty: Insights from Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies of Routine Health Care Data.

The objective of this review is to summarize and appraise the research methodology, emerging findings, and future directions in pharmacoepidemiologic studies assessing the benefits and harms of pharmacotherapies in older adults with different levels of frailty. Older adults living with frailty are at elevated risk for poor health outcomes and adverse effects from pharmacotherapy. However, current evidence is limited due to the under-enrollment of frail older adults and the lack of validated frailty assessments in clinical trials. Recent advancements in measuring frailty in administrative claims and electronic health records (database-derived frailty scores) have enabled researchers to identify patients with frailty and to evaluate the heterogeneity of treatment effects by patients' frailty levels using routine health care data. When selecting a database-derived frailty score, researchers must consider the type of data (e.g., different coding systems), the length of the predictor assessment period, the extent of validation against clinically validated frailty measures, and the possibility of surveillance bias arising from unequal access to care. We reviewed 13 pharmacoepidemiologic studies published on PubMed from 2013 to 2023 that evaluated the benefits and harms of cardiovascular medications, diabetes medications, anti-neoplastic agents, antipsychotic medications, and vaccines by frailty levels. These studies suggest that, while greater frailty is positively associated with adverse treatment outcomes, older adults with frailty can still benefit from pharmacotherapy. Therefore, we recommend routine frailty subgroup analyses in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Despite data and design limitations, the findings from such studies may be informative to tailor pharmacotherapy for older adults across the frailty spectrum.

Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibitors and Dementia Risk: Confounding by Indication in Real-World Studies.

Pharmacoepidemiologic studies using routinely collected data allow researchers to propose drugs for repurposing trials for dementia prevention or treatment. A recent cohort study reported a 54% lower dementia risk among users of sildenafil compared to users of certain cardiovascular medications. We caution that "confounding by indication" can arise when outcomes are compared between a drug of interest and an inappropriate comparator. Here, we emphasize important considerations in selecting an active comparator. We assess the implications of substantial risk of confounding by indication in pharmacoepidemiologic studies linking phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors to lower dementia risk.

Describing diversity of real world data sources in pharmacoepidemiologic studies: The DIVERSE scoping review.

PURPOSE: Real-world evidence (RWE) is increasingly used for medical regulatory decisions, yet concerns persist regarding its reproducibility and hence validity. This study addresses reproducibility challenges associated with diversity across real-world data sources (RWDS) repurposed for secondary use in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Our aims were to identify, describe and characterize practices, recommendations and tools for collecting and reporting diversity across RWDSs, and explore how leveraging diversity could improve the quality of evidence. METHODS: In a preliminary phase, keywords for a literature search and selection tool were designed using a set of documents considered to be key by the coauthors. Next, a systematic search was conducted up to December 2021. The resulting documents were screened based on titles and abstracts, then based on full texts using the selection tool. Selected documents were reviewed to extract information on topics related to collecting and reporting RWDS diversity. A content analysis of the topics identified explicit and latent themes. RESULTS: Across the 91 selected documents, 12 topics were identified: 9 dimensions used to describe RWDS (organization accessing the data source, data originator, prompt, inclusion of population, content, data dictionary, time span, healthcare system and culture, and data quality), tools to summarize such dimensions, challenges, and opportunities arising from diversity. Thirty-six themes were identified within the dimensions. Opportunities arising from data diversity included multiple imputation and standardization. CONCLUSIONS: The dimensions identified across a large number of publications lay the foundation for formal guidance on reporting diversity of data sources to facilitate interpretation and enhance replicability and validity of RWE.

Calculating daily dose in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model.

PURPOSE: We aimed to develop a standardized method to calculate daily dose (i.e., the amount of drug a patient was exposed to per day) of any drug on a global scale using only drug information of typical observational data in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model (OMOP CDM) and a single reference table from Observational Health Data Sciences And Informatics (OHDSI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The OMOP DRUG_STRENGTH reference table contains information on the strength or concentration of drugs, whereas the OMOP DRUG_EXPOSURE table contains information on patients' drug prescriptions or dispensations/claims. Based on DRUG_EXPOSURE data from the primary care databases Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD (United Kingdom) and Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI, The Netherlands) and healthcare claims from PharMetrics® Plus for Academics (USA), we developed four formulas to calculate daily dose given different DRUG_STRENGTH reference table information. We tested the dose formulas by comparing the calculated median daily dose to the World Health Organization (WHO) Defined Daily Dose (DDD) for six different ingredients in those three databases and additional four international databases representing a variety of healthcare settings: MAITT (Estonia, healthcare claims and discharge summaries), IQVIA Disease Analyzer Germany (outpatient data), IQVIA Longitudinal Patient Database Belgium (outpatient data), and IMASIS Parc Salut (Spain, hospital data). Finally, in each database, we assessed the proportion of drug records for which daily dose calculations were possible using the suggested formulas. RESULTS: Applying the dose formulas, we obtained median daily doses that generally matched the WHO DDD definitions. Our dose formulas were applicable to >85% of drug records in all but one of the assessed databases. CONCLUSION: We have established and implemented a standardized daily dose calculation in OMOP CDM providing reliable and reproducible results.

Transparency, reproducibility, and replicability of pharmacoepidemiology studies in a distributed network environment.

PURPOSE: Our objective is to describe how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Sentinel System implements best practices to ensure trust in drug safety studies using real-world data from disparate sources. METHODS: We present a stepwise schematic for Sentinel's data harmonization, data quality check, query design and implementation, and reporting practices, and describe approaches to enhancing the transparency, reproducibility, and replicability of studies at each step. CONCLUSIONS: Each Sentinel data partner converts its source data into the Sentinel Common Data Model. The transformed data undergoes rigorous quality checks before it can be used for Sentinel queries. The Sentinel Common Data Model framework, data transformation codes for several data sources, and data quality assurance packages are publicly available. Designed to run against the Sentinel Common Data Model, Sentinel's querying system comprises a suite of pre-tested, parametrizable computer programs that allow users to perform sophisticated descriptive and inferential analysis without having to exchange individual-level data across sites. Detailed documentation of capabilities of the programs as well as the codes and information required to execute them are publicly available on the Sentinel website. Sentinel also provides public trainings and online resources to facilitate use of its data model and querying system. Its study specifications conform to established reporting frameworks aimed at facilitating reproducibility and replicability of real-world data studies. Reports from Sentinel queries and associated design and analytic specifications are available for download on the Sentinel website. Sentinel is an example of how real-world data can be used to generate regulatory-grade evidence at scale using a transparent, reproducible, and replicable process.

Application of a data continuity prediction algorithm to an electronic health record-based pharmacoepidemiology study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Use of algorithms to identify patients with high data-continuity in electronic health records (EHRs) may increase study validity. Practical experience with this approach remains limited. METHODS: We developed and validated four algorithms to identify patients with high data continuity in an EHR-based data source. Selected algorithms were then applied to a pharmacoepidemiologic study comparing rates of COVID-19 hospitalization in patients exposed to insulin versus noninsulin antidiabetic drugs. RESULTS: A model using a short list of five EHR-derived variables performed as well as more complex models to distinguish high- from low-data continuity patients. Higher data continuity was associated with more accurate ascertainment of key variables. In the pharmacoepidemiologic study, patients with higher data continuity had higher observed rates of the COVID-19 outcome and a large unadjusted association between insulin use and the outcome, but no association after propensity score adjustment. DISCUSSION: We found that a simple, portable algorithm to predict data continuity gave comparable performance to more complex methods. Use of the algorithm significantly impacted the results of an empirical study, with evidence of more valid results at higher levels of data continuity.

Learning with an evolving medicine label: how artificial intelligence-based medication recommendation systems must adapt to changing medication labels.

INTRODUCTION: Artificial intelligence or machine learning (AI/ML) based systems can help personalize prescribing decisions for individual patients. The recommendations of these clinical decision support systems must relate to the "label" of the medicines involved. The label of a medicine is an approved guide that indicates how to prescribe the drug in a safe and effective manner. AREAS COVERED: The label for a medicine may evolve as new information on drug safety and effectiveness emerges, leading to the addition or removal of warnings, drug-drug interactions, or to permit new indications. However, the speed at which these updates are made to these AI/ML recommendation systems may be delayed and could influence the safety of prescribing decisions. This article explores the need to keep AI/ML tools 'in sync' with any label changes. Additionally, challenges relating to medicine availability and geographical suitability are discussed. EXPERT OPINION: These considerations highlight the important role that pharmacoepidemiologists and drug safety professionals must play within the monitoring and use of these tools. Furthermore, these issues highlight the guiding role that regulators need to have in planning and oversight of these tools.

Artificial intelligence or machine learning (AI/ML) based systems that guide the prescription of medications have the potential to vastly improve patient care, but these tools should only provide recommendations that are in line with the label of a medicine. With a constantly evolving medication label, this is likely to be a challenge, and this also has implications for the off-label use of medicines.

Quasi-experimental methods for pharmacoepidemiology: difference-in-differences and synthetic control methods with case studies for vaccine evaluation.

Difference-in-differences and synthetic control methods have become common study designs for evaluating the effects of changes in policies, including health policies. They also have potential for providing real-world effectiveness and safety evidence in pharmacoepidemiology. To effectively add to the toolkit of the field, however, designs-including both their benefits and drawbacks-must be well understood. Quasi-experimental designs provide an opportunity to estimate the average treatment effect on the treated without requiring the measurement of all possible confounding factors, and to assess population-level effects. This requires, however, other key assumptions, including the parallel trends or stable weighting assumptions, a lack of other concurrent events that could alter time trends, and an absence of contamination between exposed and unexposed units. The targeted estimands are also highly specific to the settings of the study, and combining across units or time periods can be challenging. Case studies are presented for 3 vaccine evaluation studies, showcasing some of these challenges and opportunities in a specific field of pharmacoepidemiology. These methods provide feasible and valuable sources of evidence in various pharmacoepidemiologic settings and can be improved through research to identify and weigh the advantages and disadvantages in those settings. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Standardizing to specific target populations in distributed networks and multisite pharmacoepidemiologic studies.

Distributed network studies and multisite studies assess drug safety and effectiveness in diverse populations by pooling information. Targeting groups of clinical or policy interest (including specific sites or site combinations) and applying weights based on effect measure modifiers (EMMs) prior to pooling estimates within multisite studies may increase interpretability and improve precision. We simulated a 4-site study, standardized each site using inverse odds weights (IOWs) to resemble the 3 smallest sites or the smallest site, estimated IOW-weighted risk differences (RDs), and combined estimates with inverse variance weights (IVWs). We also created an artificial distributed network in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum consisting of 1 site for each geographic region. We compared metformin and sulfonylurea initiators with respect to mortality, targeting the smallest region. In the simulation, IOWs reduced differences between estimates and increased precision when targeting the 3 smallest sites or the smallest site. In the CPRD Aurum study, the IOW + IVW estimate was also more precise (smallest region: RD = 5.41% [95% CI, 1.03-9.79]; IOW + IVW estimate: RD = 3.25% [95% CI, 3.07-3.43]). When performing pharmacoepidemiologic research in distributed networks or multisite studies in the presence of EMMs, designation of target populations has the potential to improve estimate precision and interpretability. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Core concepts in pharmacoepidemiology: Measurement of medication exposure in routinely collected healthcare data for causal inference studies in pharmacoepidemiology.

BACKGROUND: Observational designs can complement evidence from randomized controlled trials not only in situations when randomization is not feasible, but also by evaluating drug effects in real-world, considering a broader spectrum of users and clinical scenarios. However, use of such real-world scenarios captured in routinely collected clinical or administrative data also comes with specific challenges. Unlike in trials, medication use is not protocol based. Instead, exposure is determined by a multitude of factors involving patients, providers, healthcare access, and other policies. Accurate measurement of medication exposure relies on a similar broad set of factors which, if not understood and appropriately addressed, can lead to exposure misclassification and bias. AIM: To describe core considerations for measurement of medication exposure in routinely collected healthcare data. METHODS: We describe the strengths and weaknesses of the two main types of routinely collected healthcare data (electronic health records and administrative claims) used in pharmacoepidemiologic research. We introduce key elements in those data sources and issues in the curation process that should be considered when developing exposure definitions. We present challenges in exposure measurement such as the appropriate determination of exposure time windows or the delineation of concomitant medication use versus switching of therapy, and related implications for bias. RESULTS: We note that true exposure patterns are typically unknown when using routinely collected healthcare data and that an in-depth understanding of healthcare delivery, patient and provider decision-making, data documentation and governance, as well as pharmacology are needed to ensure unbiased approaches to measuring exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Various assumptions are made with the goal that the chosen exposure definition can approximate true exposure. However, the possibility of exposure misclassification remains, and sensitivity analyses that can test the impact of such assumptions on the robustness of estimated medication effects are necessary to support causal inferences.

Overview of global real-world data sources for pediatric pharmacoepidemiologic research.

PURPOSE: Given limited information available on real-world data (RWD) sources with pediatric populations, this study describes features of globally available RWD sources for pediatric pharmacoepidemiologic research. METHODS: An online questionnaire about pediatric RWD sources and their attributes and capabilities was completed by members and affiliates of the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology and representatives of nominated databases. All responses were verified by database representatives and summarized. RESULTS: Of 93 RWD sources identified, 55 unique pediatric RWD sources were verified, including data from Europe (47%), United States (38%), multiregion (7%), Asia-Pacific (5%), and South America (2%). Most databases had nationwide coverage (82%), contained electronic health/medical records (47%) and/or administrative claims data (42%) and were linkable to other databases (65%). Most (71%) had limited outside access (e.g., by approval or through local collaborators); only 10 (18%) databases were publicly available. Six databases (11%) reported having >20 million pediatric observations. Most (91%) included children of all ages (birth until 18th birthday) and contained outpatient medication data (93%), while half (49%) contained inpatient medication data. Many databases captured vaccine information for children (71%), and one-third had regularly updated data on pediatric height (31%) and weight (33%). Other pediatric data attributes captured include diagnoses and comorbidities (89%), lab results (58%), vital signs (55%), devices (55%), imaging results (42%), narrative patient histories (35%), and genetic/biomarker data (22%). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an overview with key details about diverse databases that allow researchers to identify fit-for-purpose RWD sources suitable for pediatric pharmacoepidemiologic research.

The State of Use and Utility of Negative Controls in Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies.

Uses of real-world data in drug safety and effectiveness studies are often challenged by various sources of bias. We undertook a systematic search of the published literature through September 2020 to evaluate the state of use and utility of negative controls to address bias in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Two reviewers independently evaluated study eligibility and abstracted data. Our search identified 184 eligible studies for inclusion. Cohort studies (115, 63%) and administrative data (114, 62%) were, respectively, the most common study design and data type used. Most studies used negative control outcomes (91, 50%), and for most studies the target source of bias was unmeasured confounding (93, 51%). We identified 4 utility domains of negative controls: 1) bias detection (149, 81%), 2) bias correction (16, 9%), 3) P-value calibration (8, 4%), and 4) performance assessment of different methods used in drug safety studies (31, 17%). The most popular methodologies used were the 95% confidence interval and P-value calibration. In addition, we identified 2 reference sets with structured steps to check the causality assumption of the negative control. While negative controls are powerful tools in bias detection, we found many studies lacked checking the underlying assumptions. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Published registry-based pharmacoepidemiologic associations show limited concordance with agnostic medication-wide analyses.

OBJECTIVES: To assess how the results of published national registry-based pharmacoepidemiology studies (where select associations are of interest) compare with an agnostic medication-wide approach (where all possible drug associations are tested). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We systematically searched for publications that reported drug associations with any, breast, colon/colorectal, or prostate cancer in the Swedish Prescribed Drug Registry. Results were compared against a previously performed agnostic medication-wide study on the same registry. PROTOCOL: https://osf.io/kqj8n. RESULTS: Most published studies (25/32) investigated previously reported associations. 421/913 (46%) associations had statistically significant results. 134 of the 162 unique drug-cancer associations could be paired with 70 associations in the agnostic study (corresponding drug categories and cancer types). Published studies reported smaller effect sizes and absolute effect sizes than the agnostic study, and generally used more adjustments. Agnostic analyses were less likely to report statistically significant protective associations (based on a multiplicity-corrected threshold) than their paired associations in published studies (McNemar odds ratio 0.13, P = 0.0022). Among 162 published associations, 36 (22%) showed increased risk signal and 25 (15%) protective signal at P < 0.05, while for agnostic associations, 237 (11%) showed increased risk signal and 108 (5%) protective signal at a multiplicity-corrected threshold. Associations belonging to drug categories targeted by individual published studies vs. nontargeted had smaller average effect sizes; smaller P values; and more frequent risk signals. CONCLUSION: Published pharmacoepidemiology studies using a national registry addressed mostly previously proposed associations, were mostly "negative", and showed only modest concordance with their respective agnostic analyses in the same registry.

The application of lag times in cancer pharmacoepidemiology: a narrative review.

PURPOSE: With the increasing utilization of medications worldwide, coupled with the increasing availability of long-term data, there is a growing opportunity and need for robust studies evaluating drug-cancer associations. One methodology of importance in such studies is the application of lag times. METHODS: In this narrative review, we discuss the main reasons for using lag times. RESULTS: Namely, we discuss the typically long latency period of cancer concerning both tumor promoter and initiator effects and outline why cancer latency is a key consideration when choosing a lag time. We also discuss how the use of lag times can help reduce protopathic and detection bias. Finally, we present practical advice for implementing lag periods. CONCLUSIONS: In general, we recommend that researchers consider the information that generated the hypothesis as well as clinical and biological knowledge to inform lag period selection. In addition, given that latency periods are usually unknown, we also advocate that researchers examine multiple lag periods in sensitivity analyses as well as duration analyses and flexible modeling approaches.