Comparative estimation of the effects of antihypertensive medications on schizophrenia occurrence: a multinational observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The association between antihypertensive medication and schizophrenia has received increasing attention; however, evidence of the impact of antihypertensive medication on subsequent schizophrenia based on large-scale observational studies is limited. We aimed to compare the schizophrenia risk in large claims-based US and Korea cohort of patients with hypertension using angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus those using angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or thiazide diuretics. METHODS: Adults aged 18 years who were newly diagnosed with hypertension and received ACE inhibitors, ARBs, or thiazide diuretics as first-line antihypertensive medications were included. The study population was sub-grouped based on age (> 45 years). The comparison groups were matched using a large-scale propensity score (PS)-matching algorithm. The primary endpoint was incidence of schizophrenia. RESULTS: 5,907,522; 2,923,423; and 1,971,549 patients used ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and thiazide diuretics, respectively. After PS matching, the risk of schizophrenia was not significantly different among the groups (ACE inhibitor vs. ARB: summary hazard ratio [HR] 1.15 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.99-1.33]; ACE inhibitor vs. thiazide diuretics: summary HR 0.91 [95% CI, 0.78-1.07]). In the older subgroup, there was no significant difference between ACE inhibitors and thiazide diuretics (summary HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.71-1.16]). The risk for schizophrenia was significantly higher in the ACE inhibitor group than in the ARB group (summary HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.05-1.43]). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of schizophrenia was not significantly different between the ACE inhibitor vs. ARB and ACE inhibitor vs. thiazide diuretic groups. Further investigations are needed to determine the risk of schizophrenia associated with antihypertensive drugs, especially in people aged > 45 years.

Long-term clinical outcomes of aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease: Real-world data from an adult asthma cohort.

BACKGROUND: Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) is a phenotype of severe asthma, but its disease course has not been well documented compared with that of aspirin-tolerant asthma (ATA). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes between AERD and ATA. METHODS: AERD patients were identified by the diagnostic code and positive bronchoprovocation test in a real-world database. Longitudinal changes in lung function, blood eosinophil/neutrophil counts, and annual numbers of severe asthma exacerbations (AEx) were compared between the AERD and the ATA groups. Within a year after baseline, two or more severe AEx events indicated severe AERD, whereas less than two AEx events indicated nonsevere AERD. RESULTS: Among asthmatics, 353 had AERD in which 166 and 187 patients had severe and nonsevere AERD, respectively, and 717 had ATA. AERD patients had significantly lower FEV1%, higher blood neutrophil counts, and higher sputum eosinophils (%) (all p < .05) as well as higher levels of urinary LTE4 and serum periostin, and lower levels of serum myeloperoxidase and surfactant protein D (all p < .01) than those with ATA. In a 10-year follow-up, the severe AERD group maintained lower FEV1% with more severe AEs than the nonsevere AERD group. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We demonstrated that AERD patients presented poorer long-term clinical outcomes than ATA patients in real-world data analyses.

Safety outcomes of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in adolescent attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid depression: the ASSURE study.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is related to depressive disorder, and adolescents with both present poor outcomes. However, evidence for the safety of concomitantly using a methylphenidate (MPH) and a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) among adolescent ADHD patients is limited, a literature gap aimed to address through this investigation. METHODS: We conducted a new-user cohort study using a nationwide claims database in South Korea. We identified a study population as adolescents who were diagnosed both ADHD and depressive disorder. MPH-only users were compared with patients who prescribed both a SSRI and a MPH. Fluoxetine and escitalopram users were also compared to find a preferable treatment option. Thirteen outcomes including neuropsychiatric, gastrointestinal, and other events were assessed, taking respiratory tract infection as a negative control outcome. We matched the study groups using a propensity score and used the Cox proportional hazard model to calculate the hazard ratio. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted in various epidemiologic settings. RESULTS: The risks of all the outcomes between the MPH-only and SSRI groups were not significantly different. Regarding SSRI ingredients, the risk of tic disorder was significantly lower in the fluoxetine group than the escitalopram group [HR 0.43 (0.25-0.71)]. However, there was no significant difference in other outcomes between the fluoxetine and escitalopram groups. CONCLUSION: The concomitant use of MPHs and SSRIs showed generally safe profiles in adolescent ADHD patients with depression. Most of the differences between fluoxetine and escitalopram, except those concerning tic disorder, were not significant.

Impact of Trimetazidine on the Incident Heart Failure After Coronary Artery Revascularization.

ABSTRACT: Abnormal myocardial metabolism is a common pathophysiological process underlying ischemic heart disease and heart failure (HF). Trimetazidine is an antianginal agent with a unique mechanism of action that regulates myocardial energy metabolism and might have a beneficial effect in preventing HF in patients undergoing myocardial revascularization. We aimed to evaluate the potential benefit of trimetazidine in preventing incident hospitalization for HF after myocardial revascularization. Using the common data model, we identified patients without prior HF undergoing myocardial revascularization from 8 hospital databases in Korea. To compare clinical outcomes using trimetazidine, database-level hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using large-scale propensity score matching for each database and pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was incident hospitalization for HF. The secondary outcome of interest was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). After propensity score matching, 6724 and 11,211 patients were allocated to trimetazidine new-users and nonusers, respectively. There was no significant difference in the incidence of hospitalization for HF between the 2 groups (HR: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.31; P = 0.46). The risk of MACE also did not differ between the 2 groups (HR: 1.07, 95% CI, 0.98-1.16; P = 0.15). In conclusion, the use of trimetazidine did not reduce the risk of hospitalization for HF or MACE in patients undergoing myocardial revascularization. Therefore, the role of trimetazidine in contemporary clinical practice cannot be expanded beyond its current role as an add-on treatment for symptomatic angina.

Impact of concomitant cardiovascular medications on overall survival in patients with liver cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVES OF THE ARTICLE: Liver cirrhosis is the end-stage liver disease associated with poor prognosis and cardiovascular comorbidity could significantly impact mortality of cirrhotic patients. We conducted a large, retrospective study to investigate the survival impact of cardiovascular co-medications in patients with liver cirrhosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A study-specific R package was processed on the local databases of partner institutions within the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics consortium, namely Columbia University, New York City (NYC), USA and Ajou University School of Medicine (AUSOM), South Korea. Patients with cirrhosis diagnosed between 2000 and 2020 were included. Final analysis of the anonymous survival data was performed at Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University. RESULTS: We investigated a total of 32,366 patients with liver cirrhosis. Our data showed that administration of antiarrhythmics amiodarone or digoxin presented as a negative prognostic indicator (p = 0.000 in both cohorts). Improved survival was associated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril (p = 0.005 in NYC cohort, p = 0.075 in AUSOM cohort) and angiotensin II receptor blocker losartan (p = 0.000 in NYC cohort, p = 0.005 in AUSOM cohort). Non-selective beta blocker carvedilol was associated with a survival advantage in the NYC (p = 0.000) cohort but not in the AUSOM cohort (p = 0.142). Patients who took platelet inhibitor clopidogrel had a prolonged overall survival compared to those without (p = 0.000 in NYC cohort, p = 0.003 in AUSOM cohort). CONCLUSION: Concomitant cardiovascular medications are associated with distinct survival difference in cirrhotic patients. Multidisciplinary management is needed for a judicious choice of proper cardiovascular co-medications in cirrhotic patients.

Efficacy of Co-Medications in Patients with Alcoholic Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND: Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is still increasing and leads to acute liver injury but also liver cirrhosis and subsequent complications such as liver failure or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). As most patients fail to achieve alcohol abstinence, it is essential to identify alternative treatment options in order to improve the outcome of ALD patients. METHODS: Evaluating two large cohorts of patients with ALD from the USA and Korea with a total of 12,006 patients, we investigated the effect on survival of aspirin, metformin, metoprolol, dopamine, and dobutamine drugs in patients with ALD between 2000 and 2020. Patient data were obtained through the "The Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics consortium," an open-source, multi-stakeholder, and interdisciplinary collaborative effort. RESULTS: The use of aspirin (p = 0.000, p = 0.000), metoprolol (p = 0.002, p = 0.000), and metformin (p = 0.000, p = 0.000) confers a survival benefit for both AUSOM- and NY-treated cohorts. Need of catecholamines dobutamine (p = 0.000, p = 0.000) and dopamine (p = 0.000, p = 0.000) was strongly indicative of poor survival. ß-Blocker treatment with metoprolol (p = 0.128, p = 0.196) or carvedilol (p = 0.520, p = 0.679) was not shown to be protective in any of the female subgroups. CONCLUSION: Overall, our data fill a large gap in long-term, real-world data on patients with ALD, confirming an impact of metformin, acetylsalicylic acid, and ß-blockers on ALD patient's survival. However, gender and ethnic background lead to diverse efficacy in those patients.

Machine learning-based prediction model for postoperative delirium in non-cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium is a common complication that is distressing. This study aimed to demonstrate a prediction model for delirium. METHODS: Among 203,374undergoing non-cardiac surgery between January 2011 and June 2019 at Samsung Medical Center, 2,865 (1.4%) were diagnosed with postoperative delirium. After comparing performances of machine learning algorithms, we chose variables for a prediction model based on an extreme gradient boosting algorithm. Using the top five variables, we generated a prediction model for delirium and conducted an external validation. The Kaplan-Meier and Cox survival analyses were used to analyse the difference of delirium occurrence in patients classified as a prediction model. RESULTS: The top five variables selected for the postoperative delirium prediction model were age, operation duration, physical status classification, male sex, and surgical risk. An optimal probability threshold in this model was estimated to be 0.02. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was 0.870 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.855-0.885, and the sensitivity and specificity of the model were 0.76 and 0.84, respectively. In an external validation, the AUROC was 0.867 (0.845-0.877). In the survival analysis, delirium occurred more frequently in the group of patients predicted as delirium using an internal validation dataset (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on machine learning techniques, we analyzed a prediction model of delirium in patients who underwent non-cardiac surgery. Screening for delirium based on the prediction model could improve postoperative care. The working model is provided online and is available for further verification among other populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: KCT 0006363.

Privacy-Preserving Federated Model Predicting Bipolar Transition in Patients With Depression: Prediction Model Development Study.

BACKGROUND: Mood disorder has emerged as a serious concern for public health; in particular, bipolar disorder has a less favorable prognosis than depression. Although prompt recognition of depression conversion to bipolar disorder is needed, early prediction is challenging due to overlapping symptoms. Recently, there have been attempts to develop a prediction model by using federated learning. Federated learning in medical fields is a method for training multi-institutional machine learning models without patient-level data sharing. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop and validate a federated, differentially private multi-institutional bipolar transition prediction model. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled patients diagnosed with the first depressive episode at 5 tertiary hospitals in South Korea. We developed models for predicting bipolar transition by using data from 17,631 patients in 4 institutions. Further, we used data from 4541 patients for external validation from 1 institution. We created standardized pipelines to extract large-scale clinical features from the 4 institutions without any code modification. Moreover, we performed feature selection in a federated environment for computational efficiency and applied differential privacy to gradient updates. Finally, we compared the federated and the 4 local models developed with each hospital's data on internal and external validation data sets. RESULTS: In the internal data set, 279 out of 17,631 patients showed bipolar disorder transition. In the external data set, 39 out of 4541 patients showed bipolar disorder transition. The average performance of the federated model in the internal test (area under the curve [AUC] 0.726) and external validation (AUC 0.719) data sets was higher than that of the other locally developed models (AUC 0.642-0.707 and AUC 0.642-0.699, respectively). In the federated model, classifications were driven by several predictors such as the Charlson index (low scores were associated with bipolar transition, which may be due to younger age), severe depression, anxiolytics, young age, and visiting months (the bipolar transition was associated with seasonality, especially during the spring and summer months). CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated a differentially private federated model by using distributed multi-institutional psychiatric data with standardized pipelines in a real-world environment. The federated model performed better than models using local data only.

Impact of pitavastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus compared to atorvastatin and rosuvastatin: a distributed network analysis of 10 real-world databases.

BACKGROUND: Statin treatment increases the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM); however, data directly comparing the risk of NODM among individual statins is limited. We compared the risk of NODM between patients using pitavastatin and atorvastatin or rosuvastatin using reliable, large-scale data. METHODS: Data of electronic health records from ten hospitals converted to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model (n = 14,605,368 patients) were used to identify new users of pitavastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin (atorvastatin + rosuvastatin) for ≥ 180 days without a previous history of diabetes or HbA1c level ≥ 5.7%. We conducted a cohort study using Cox regression analysis to examine the hazard ratio (HR) of NODM after propensity score matching (PSM) and then performed an aggregate meta-analysis of the HR. RESULTS: After 1:2 PSM, 10,238 new pitavastatin users (15,998 person-years of follow-up) and 18,605 atorvastatin + rosuvastatin users (33,477 person-years of follow-up) were pooled from 10 databases. The meta-analysis of the HRs demonstrated that pitavastatin resulted in a significantly reduced risk of NODM than atorvastatin + rosuvastatin (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.59-0.87). In sub-analysis, pitavastatin was associated with a lower risk of NODM than atorvastatin or rosuvastatin after 1:1 PSM (HR 0.69; CI 0.54-0.88 and HR 0.74; CI 0.55-0.99, respectively). A consistently low risk of NODM in pitavastatin users was observed when compared with low-to-moderate-intensity atorvastatin + rosuvastatin users (HR 0.78; CI 0.62-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective, multicenter active-comparator, new-user, cohort study, pitavastatin reduced the risk of NODM compared with atorvastatin or rosuvastatin.

Seek COVER: using a disease proxy to rapidly develop and validate a personalized risk calculator for COVID-19 outcomes in an international network.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether we could use influenza data to develop prediction models for COVID-19 to increase the speed at which prediction models can reliably be developed and validated early in a pandemic. We developed COVID-19 Estimated Risk (COVER) scores that quantify a patient's risk of hospital admission with pneumonia (COVER-H), hospitalization with pneumonia requiring intensive services or death (COVER-I), or fatality (COVER-F) in the 30-days following COVID-19 diagnosis using historical data from patients with influenza or flu-like symptoms and tested this in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We analyzed a federated network of electronic medical records and administrative claims data from 14 data sources and 6 countries containing data collected on or before 4/27/2020. We used a 2-step process to develop 3 scores using historical data from patients with influenza or flu-like symptoms any time prior to 2020. The first step was to create a data-driven model using LASSO regularized logistic regression, the covariates of which were used to develop aggregate covariates for the second step where the COVER scores were developed using a smaller set of features. These 3 COVER scores were then externally validated on patients with 1) influenza or flu-like symptoms and 2) confirmed or suspected COVID-19 diagnosis across 5 databases from South Korea, Spain, and the United States. Outcomes included i) hospitalization with pneumonia, ii) hospitalization with pneumonia requiring intensive services or death, and iii) death in the 30 days after index date. RESULTS: Overall, 44,507 COVID-19 patients were included for model validation. We identified 7 predictors (history of cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, kidney disease) which combined with age and sex discriminated which patients would experience any of our three outcomes. The models achieved good performance in influenza and COVID-19 cohorts. For COVID-19 the AUC ranges were, COVER-H: 0.69-0.81, COVER-I: 0.73-0.91, and COVER-F: 0.72-0.90. Calibration varied across the validations with some of the COVID-19 validations being less well calibrated than the influenza validations. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrated the utility of using a proxy disease to develop a prediction model. The 3 COVER models with 9-predictors that were developed using influenza data perform well for COVID-19 patients for predicting hospitalization, intensive services, and fatality. The scores showed good discriminatory performance which transferred well to the COVID-19 population. There was some miscalibration in the COVID-19 validations, which is potentially due to the difference in symptom severity between the two diseases. A possible solution for this is to recalibrate the models in each location before use.

Risks of complicated acute appendicitis in patients with psychiatric disorders.

BACKGROUND: Acute appendicitis often presents with vague abdominal pain, which fosters diagnostic challenges to clinicians regarding early detection and proper intervention. This is even more problematic with individuals with severe psychiatric disorders who have reduced sensitivity to pain due to long-term or excessive medication use or disturbed bodily sensation perceptions. This study aimed to determine whether psychiatric disorder, psychotropic prescription, and treatment compliance increase the risks of complicated acute appendicitis. METHODS: The diagnosis records of acute appendicitis from four university hospitals in Korea were investigated from 2002 to 2020. A total of 47,500 acute appendicitis-affected participants were divided into groups with complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis to determine whether any of the groups had more cases of psychiatric disorder diagnoses. Further, the ratio of complicated compared to uncomplicated appendicitis in the mentally ill group was calculated regarding psychotropic dose, prescription duration, and treatment compliance. RESULTS: After adjusting for age and sex, presence of psychotic disorder (odds ratio [OR]: 1.951; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.218-3.125), and bipolar disorder (OR: 2.323; 95% CI: 1.194-4.520) was associated with a higher risk of having complicated appendicitis compared with absence of psychiatric disorders. Patients who are taking high-daily-dose antipsychotics, regardless of prescription duration, show high complicated appendicitis risks; High-dose antipsychotics for < 1 year (OR: 1.896, 95% CI: 1.077-3.338), high-dose antipsychotics for 1-5 years (OR: 1.930, 95% CI: 1.144-3.256). Poor psychiatric outpatient compliance was associated with a high risk of complicated appendicitis (OR: 1.664, 95% CI: 1.014-2.732). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed a close relationship in the possibility of complicated appendicitis in patients with severe psychiatric disorders, including psychotic and bipolar disorders. The effect on complicated appendicitis was more remarkable by the psychiatric disease entity itself than by psychotropic prescription patterns. Good treatment compliance and regular visit may reduce the morbidity of complicated appendicitis in patients with psychiatric disorders.

Risk of Mortality in Elderly Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients With Mental Health Disorders: A Nationwide Retrospective Study in South Korea.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the different clinical characteristics among elderly coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with and without mental disorders in South Korea and determine if these characteristics have an association with underlying mental disorders causing mortality. METHOD: A population-based comparative cohort study was conducted using the national claims database. Individuals aged ≥65 years with confirmed COVID-19 between January 1, 2020 and April 10, 2020 were assessed. The endpoints for evaluating mortality for all participants were death, 21 days after diagnosis, or April 10, 2020. The risk of mortality associated with mental disorders was estimated using Cox hazards regression. RESULTS: We identified 814 elderly COVID-19 patients (255 [31.3%] with mental disorder and 559 [68.7%] with nonmental disorder). Individuals with mental disorders were found more likely to be older, taking antithrombotic agents, and had diabetes, hypertension, chronic obstructive lung disease, and urinary tract infections than those without mental disorders. After propensity score stratification, our study included 781 patients in each group (236 [30.2%] with mental disorder and 545 [69.8%] with nonmental disorder). The mental disorder group showed higher mortality rates than the nonmental disorder group (12.7% [30/236] versus 6.8% [37/545]). However, compared to patients without mental disorders, the hazard ratio (HR) for mortality in elderly COVID-19 patients with mental disorders was not statistically significant (HR: 1.57, 95%CI: 0.95-2.56). CONCLUSION: Although the association between mental disorders in elderly individuals and mortality in COVID-19 is unclear, this study suggests that elderly patients with comorbid conditions and those taking psychiatric medications might be at a higher risk of COVID-19.

Feasibility and evaluation of a large-scale external validation approach for patient-level prediction in an international data network: validation of models predicting stroke in female patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: To demonstrate how the Observational Healthcare Data Science and Informatics (OHDSI) collaborative network and standardization can be utilized to scale-up external validation of patient-level prediction models by enabling validation across a large number of heterogeneous observational healthcare datasets. METHODS: Five previously published prognostic models (ATRIA, CHADS2, CHADS2VASC, Q-Stroke and Framingham) that predict future risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation were replicated using the OHDSI frameworks. A network study was run that enabled the five models to be externally validated across nine observational healthcare datasets spanning three countries and five independent sites. RESULTS: The five existing models were able to be integrated into the OHDSI framework for patient-level prediction and they obtained mean c-statistics ranging between 0.57-0.63 across the 6 databases with sufficient data to predict stroke within 1 year of initial atrial fibrillation diagnosis for females with atrial fibrillation. This was comparable with existing validation studies. The validation network study was run across nine datasets within 60 days once the models were replicated. An R package for the study was published at https://github.com/OHDSI/StudyProtocolSandbox/tree/master/ExistingStrokeRiskExternalValidation. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the ability to scale up external validation of patient-level prediction models using a collaboration of researchers and a data standardization that enable models to be readily shared across data sites. External validation is necessary to understand the transportability or reproducibility of a prediction model, but without collaborative approaches it can take three or more years for a model to be validated by one independent researcher. In this paper we show it is possible to both scale-up and speed-up external validation by showing how validation can be done across multiple databases in less than 2 months. We recommend that researchers developing new prediction models use the OHDSI network to externally validate their models.

Association of Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel With Net Adverse Clinical Events in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Importance: Current guidelines recommend ticagrelor as the preferred P2Y12 platelet inhibitor for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), primarily based on a single large randomized clinical trial. The benefits and risks associated with ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in routine practice merits attention. Objective: To determine the association of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel with ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ACS in clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study of patients with ACS who underwent PCI and received ticagrelor or clopidogrel was conducted using 2 United States electronic health record-based databases and 1 nationwide South Korean database from November 2011 to March 2019. Patients were matched using a large-scale propensity score algorithm, and the date of final follow-up was March 2019. Exposures: Ticagrelor vs clopidogrel. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was net adverse clinical events (NACE) at 12 months, composed of ischemic events (recurrent myocardial infarction, revascularization, or ischemic stroke) and hemorrhagic events (hemorrhagic stroke or gastrointestinal bleeding). Secondary outcomes included NACE or mortality, all-cause mortality, ischemic events, hemorrhagic events, individual components of the primary outcome, and dyspnea at 12 months. The database-level hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled to calculate summary HRs by random-effects meta-analysis. Results: After propensity score matching among 31 290 propensity-matched pairs (median age group, 60-64 years; 29.3% women), 95.5% of patients took aspirin together with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. The 1-year risk of NACE was not significantly different between ticagrelor and clopidogrel (15.1% [3484/23 116 person-years] vs 14.6% [3290/22 587 person-years]; summary HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.00-1.10]; P = .06). There was also no significant difference in the risk of all-cause mortality (2.0% for ticagrelor vs 2.1% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.81-1.16]; P = .74) or ischemic events (13.5% for ticagrelor vs 13.4% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.98-1.08]; P = .32). The risks of hemorrhagic events (2.1% for ticagrelor vs 1.6% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.13-1.61]; P = .001) and dyspnea (27.3% for ticagrelor vs 22.6% for clopidogrel; summary HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.17-1.26]; P < .001) were significantly higher in the ticagrelor group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with ACS who underwent PCI in routine clinical practice, ticagrelor, compared with clopidogrel, was not associated with significant difference in the risk of NACE at 12 months. Because the possibility of unmeasured confounders cannot be excluded, further research is needed to determine whether ticagrelor is more effective than clopidogrel in this setting.

Characterizing treatment pathways at scale using the OHDSI network.

Observational research promises to complement experimental research by providing large, diverse populations that would be infeasible for an experiment. Observational research can test its own clinical hypotheses, and observational studies also can contribute to the design of experiments and inform the generalizability of experimental research. Understanding the diversity of populations and the variance in care is one component. In this study, the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) collaboration created an international data network with 11 data sources from four countries, including electronic health records and administrative claims data on 250 million patients. All data were mapped to common data standards, patient privacy was maintained by using a distributed model, and results were aggregated centrally. Treatment pathways were elucidated for type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and depression. The pathways revealed that the world is moving toward more consistent therapy over time across diseases and across locations, but significant heterogeneity remains among sources, pointing to challenges in generalizing clinical trial results. Diabetes favored a single first-line medication, metformin, to a much greater extent than hypertension or depression. About 10% of diabetes and depression patients and almost 25% of hypertension patients followed a treatment pathway that was unique within the cohort. Aside from factors such as sample size and underlying population (academic medical center versus general population), electronic health records data and administrative claims data revealed similar results. Large-scale international observational research is feasible.

Genomic Common Data Model for Seamless Interoperation of Biomedical Data in Clinical Practice: Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical sequencing data should be shared in order to achieve the sufficient scale and diversity required to provide strong evidence for improving patient care. A distributed research network allows researchers to share this evidence rather than the patient-level data across centers, thereby avoiding privacy issues. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) common data model (CDM) used in distributed research networks has low coverage of sequencing data and does not reflect the latest trends of precision medicine. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the feasibility of a genomic CDM (G-CDM), as an extension of the OMOP-CDM, for application of genomic data in clinical practice. METHODS: Existing genomic data models and sequencing reports were reviewed to extend the OMOP-CDM to cover genomic data. The Human Genome Organisation Gene Nomenclature Committee and Human Genome Variation Society nomenclature were adopted to standardize the terminology in the model. Sequencing data of 114 and 1060 patients with lung cancer were obtained from the Ajou University School of Medicine database of Ajou University Hospital and The Cancer Genome Atlas, respectively, which were transformed to a format appropriate for the G-CDM. The data were compared with respect to gene name, variant type, and actionable mutations. RESULTS: The G-CDM was extended into four tables linked to tables of the OMOP-CDM. Upon comparison with The Cancer Genome Atlas data, a clinically actionable mutation, p.Leu858Arg, in the EGFR gene was 6.64 times more frequent in the Ajou University School of Medicine database, while the p.Gly12Xaa mutation in the KRAS gene was 2.02 times more frequent in The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset. The data-exploring tool GeneProfiler was further developed to conduct descriptive analyses automatically using the G-CDM, which provides the proportions of genes, variant types, and actionable mutations. GeneProfiler also allows for querying the specific gene name and Human Genome Variation Society nomenclature to calculate the proportion of patients with a given mutation. CONCLUSIONS: We developed the G-CDM for effective integration of genomic data with standardized clinical data, allowing for data sharing across institutes. The feasibility of the G-CDM was validated by assessing the differences in data characteristics between two different genomic databases through the proposed data-exploring tool GeneProfiler. The G-CDM may facilitate analyses of interoperating clinical and genomic datasets across multiple institutions, minimizing privacy issues and enabling researchers to better understand the characteristics of patients and promote personalized medicine in clinical practice.

Application and optimisation of the Comparison on Extreme Laboratory Tests (CERT) algorithm for detection of adverse drug reactions: Transferability across national boundaries.

PURPOSE: The Singapore regulatory agency for health products (Health Sciences Authority), in performing active surveillance of medicines and their potential harms, is open to new methods to achieve this goal. Laboratory tests are a potential source of data for this purpose. We have examined the performance of the Comparison on Extreme Laboratory Tests (CERT) algorithm, developed by Ajou University, Korea, as a potential tool for adverse drug reaction detection based on the electronic medical records of the Singapore health care system. METHODS: We implemented the original CERT algorithm, comparing extreme laboratory results pre- and post-drug exposure, and 5 variations thereof using 4.5 years of National University Hospital (NUH) electronic medical record data (31 869 588 laboratory tests, 6 699 591 drug dispensings from 272 328 hospitalizations). We investigated 6 drugs from the original CERT paper and an additional 47 drugs. We benchmarked results against a reference standard that we created from UpToDate 2015. RESULTS: The original CERT algorithm applied to all 53 drugs and 44 laboratory abnormalities yielded a positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity of 50.3% and 54.1%, respectively. By raising the minimum number of cases for each drug-laboratory abnormality pair from 2 to 400, the PPV and sensitivity increased to 53.9% and 67.2%, respectively. This post hoc variation, named CERT400, performed particularly well for drug-induced hepatic and renal toxicities. DISCUSSION: We have demonstrated that the CERT algorithm can be applied across national boundaries. One modification (CERT400) was able to identify adverse drug reaction signals from laboratory data with reasonable PPV and sensitivity, which indicates potential utility as a supplementary pharmacovigilance tool.

Comparing the standards of one metabolic equivalent of task in accurately estimating physical activity energy expenditure based on acceleration.

The purpose of the study is to analyse how the standard of resting metabolic rate (RMR) affects estimation of the metabolic equivalent of task (MET) using an accelerometer. In order to investigate the effect on estimation according to intensity of activity, comparisons were conducted between the 3.5 ml O2 · kg-1 · min-1 and individually measured resting VO2 as the standard of 1 MET. MET was estimated by linear regression equations that were derived through five-fold cross-validation using 2 types of MET values and accelerations; the accuracy of estimation was analysed through cross-validation, Bland and Altman plot, and one-way ANOVA test. There were no significant differences in the RMS error after cross-validation. However, the individual RMR-based estimations had as many as 0.5 METs of mean difference in modified Bland and Altman plots than RMR of 3.5 ml O2 · kg-1 · min-1. Finally, the results of an ANOVA test indicated that the individual RMR-based estimations had less significant differences between the reference and estimated values at each intensity of activity. In conclusion, the RMR standard is a factor that affects accurate estimation of METs by acceleration; therefore, RMR requires individual specification when it is used for estimation of METs using an accelerometer.