Calibrating Observational Health Record Data Against a Randomized Trial.

Importance: The conditions required for health record data sources to accurately assess treatment effectiveness remain unclear. Emulation of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with health record data and subsequent calibration of the results can help elucidate this. Objective: To pilot an emulation of the KEYNOTE-189 RCT using a commercially available electronic health record (EHR) data source. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used an EHR database spanning from April 2007 to February 2023. Follow-up began on treatment initiation and proceeded until an outcome event, loss to follow-up, end of data, or end of study period (640 days). The population-based cohort was ascertained from EHRs provided by 52 health systems across the US. Eligibility criteria were defined as closely as possible to the benchmark RCT. Patients with non-small cell lung cancer initiating first-line treatment for metastatic disease were included. Patients with evidence of squamous non-small cell lung cancer, primary nonlung malignant neoplasms, or identified EGFR/ALK variations were excluded. Data were analyzed from June to October 2023. Exposures: Initiation of first-line pembrolizumab and chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone. Chemotherapy in both groups was defined as a combination of pemetrexed and platinum-based (carboplatin or cisplatin) therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were 12-month survival probability and mortality hazard ratio (HR). Results: A total of 1854 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.7 [9.6] years; 971 [52.4%] men) were eligible, including 589 patients who initiated pembrolizumab and chemotherapy and 1265 patients who initiated chemotherapy only. The cohort included 364 Black patients (19.6%) and 1445 White patients (77.9%). The 12-month survival probabilities were 0.60 (95% CI, 0.54-0.65) in the pembrolizumab group and 0.58 (95% CI, 0.55-0.62) in the chemotherapy-only group, compared with 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64-0.74) in the KEYNOTE-189 pembrolizumab group and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.42-0.56) in the KEYNOTE-189 chemotherapy-only group. The mortality HR was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.78-1.16), compared with 0.49 (95% CI, 0.38-0.64) in the KEYNOTE-189 RCT. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study piloting an RCT emulation, results were incongruous with the benchmark trial. Differences in patient treatment and data capture between the RCT and EHR populations, confounding by indication, treatment crossover, and accuracy of captured diagnoses may explain these findings. Future feasibility assessments will require data sources to have important oncology-specific measures curated.

Bariatric surgery and all-cause mortality: A methodological review of studies using a non-surgical comparator.

AIM: Non-randomized studies on bariatric surgery have reported large reductions in mortality within 6-12 months after surgery compared with non-surgical patients. It is unclear whether these findings are the result of bias. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched PubMed to identify all non-randomized studies investigating the effect of bariatric surgery on all-cause mortality compared with non-surgical patients. We assessed these studies for potential confounding and time-related biases. We conducted bias analyses to quantify the effect of these biases. RESULTS: We identified 21 cohort studies that met our inclusion criteria. Among those, 11 were affected by immortal time bias resulting from the misclassification or exclusion of relevant follow-up time. Five studies were subject to potential confounding bias because of a lack of adjustment for body mass index (BMI). All studies used an inadequate comparator group that lacked indications for bariatric surgery. Bias analyses to correct for potential confounding from BMI shifted the effect estimates towards the null [reported hazard ratio (HR): 0.78 vs. bias-adjusted HR: 0.92]. Bias analyses to correct for the presence of immortal time also shifted the effect estimates towards the null (adjustment for 2-year wait time: reported HR: 0.57 vs. bias-adjusted HR: 0.81). CONCLUSION: Several important sources of bias were identified in non-randomized studies of the effectiveness of bariatric surgery versus non-surgical comparators on mortality. Future studies should ensure that confounding by BMI is accounted for, considering the choice of the comparator group, and that the design or analysis avoids immortal time bias from the misclassification or exclusion.

Effectiveness and safety of empagliflozin: final results from the EMPRISE study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Limited evidence exists on the comparative safety and effectiveness of empagliflozin against alternative glucose-lowering medications in individuals with type 2 diabetes with the broad spectrum of cardiovascular risk. The EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) cohort study was designed to monitor the safety and effectiveness of empagliflozin periodically for a period of 5 years with data collection from electronic healthcare databases. METHODS: We identified individuals ≥18 years old with type 2 diabetes who initiated empagliflozin or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) from 2014 to 2019 using US Medicare and commercial claims databases. After 1:1 propensity score matching using 143 baseline characteristics, we identified four a priori-defined effectiveness outcomes: (1) myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke; (2) hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF); (3) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE); and (4) cardiovascular mortality or HHF. Safety outcomes included lower-limb amputations, non-vertebral fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), acute kidney injury (AKI), severe hypoglycaemia, retinopathy progression, and short-term kidney and bladder cancers. We estimated HRs and rate differences (RDs) per 1000 person-years, overall and stratified by age, sex, baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and heart failure. RESULTS: We identified 115,116 matched pairs. Compared with DPP-4i, empagliflozin was associated with lower risks of MI/stroke (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81, 0.96]; RD -2.08 [95% CI (-3.26, -0.90]), HHF (HR 0.50 [0.44, 0.56]; RD -5.35 [-6.22, -4.49]), MACE (HR 0.73 [0.62, 0.86]; RD -6.37 [-8.98, -3.77]) and cardiovascular mortality/HHF (HR 0.57 [0.47, 0.69]; RD -10.36 [-12.63, -8.12]). Absolute benefits were larger in older individuals and in those with ASCVD/heart failure. Empagliflozin was associated with an increased risk of DKA (HR 1.78 [1.44, 2.19]; RD 1.59 [1.08, 2.09]); decreased risks of AKI (HR 0.62 [0.54, 0.72]; RD -2.39 [-3.08, -1.71]), hypoglycaemia (HR 0.75 [0.67, 0.84]; RD -2.46 [-3.32, -1.60]) and retinopathy progression (HR 0.78 [0.63, 0.96)]; RD -9.49 [-16.97, -2.10]); and similar risks of other safety events. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Empagliflozin relative to DPP-4i was associated with risk reductions of MI or stroke, HHF, MACE and the composite of cardiovascular mortality or HHF. Absolute risk reductions were larger in older individuals and in those who had history of ASCVD or heart failure. Regarding the safety outcomes, empagliflozin was associated with an increased risk of DKA and lower risks of AKI, hypoglycaemia and progression to proliferative retinopathy, with no difference in the short-term risks of lower-extremity amputation, non-vertebral fractures, kidney and renal pelvis cancer, and bladder cancer.

Patient Characteristics Associated With Using Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative to oral anticoagulants (OACs) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, but the predictors of LAAO use in routine care are unclear. We aimed to assess the utilization trends of LAAO and compare the change in characteristics of LAAO users versus OACs since its marketing. METHODS: Using the US Medicare claims database (March 15, 2015, to December 31, 2020), we identified patients with atrial fibrillation, ≥65 years, and CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women), with either first implantation of an LAAO device or initiation of OACs, including apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, or warfarin. Patient characteristics, measured 365 days before the first LAAO or OAC use date, were compared using logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 30 058 LAAO recipients (mean age, 77.74 years; female, 42.1%) and 792 600 OAC initiators (mean age, 78.48; female, 53.3%). In 2020, patients had higher odds of initiating LAAO use than in 2015 (0.52 versus 9.32%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 13.64 [95% CI, 12.56-14.81]). Old age (ie, >85 versus 65-75 years; aOR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.80-0.88]), female sex (aOR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.71-0.76]), Black race (aOR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.58-0.68]) versus White race, and Medicaid eligibility (aOR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.58-0.64]) were associated with lower odds of receiving LAAO. Among clinical characteristics, frailty, cancer, fractures, and venous thromboembolism were associated with lower odds of LAAO use, while history of intracranial and extracranial bleeding, coagulopathy, and falls were associated with higher odds of receiving LAAO. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atrial fibrillation receiving stroke-preventive therapy, LAAO use increased rapidly from 2015 to 2020 and was positively associated with the risk factors for OAC complications but negatively associated with old age, advanced frailty, and cancer. Black race and female sex were associated with a lower likelihood of receiving LAAO.

Prevalence of Pretreatment Testing Recommended for Patients With Chronic Inflammatory Skin Diseases.

Importance: Laboratory testing for the presence of tuberculosis, hepatitis, and other conditions before starting most systemic immunomodulatory agents is recommended in patients with chronic inflammatory skin diseases (CISD) but current testing patterns in the US are unclear. Objective: To determine the prevalence of pretreatment testing that is recommended for patients with CISD (psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa, or atopic dermatitis). Design, Setting, and Participants: This descriptive analysis of US commercial insurance claims databases from December 31, 2002, to December 31, 2020, included adult patients with CISD (psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa, or atopic dermatitis) who started an immunomodulatory agent, including methotrexate, tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors, interleukin (IL)-17Ai, ustekinumab, IL-23i, dupilumab, or apremilast. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of patients who underwent the screening tests as suggested by professional societies-including for tuberculosis, hepatitis, and liver function; complete blood cell counts; and lipid panels-were determined within 6 months before and during 2 years after treatment start. Results: A total of 122 308 patients with CISDs (median [IQR] age, 49 [38-58] years; 63 663 [52.1%] male) starting systemic immunomodulatory treatment in the US were included. Treatment for patients with CISDs comprised methotrexate (28 684), tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors (40 965), ustekinumab (12 841), IL-23i (6116), IL-17Ai (9799), dupilumab (7787), or apremilast (16 116). Complete blood cell count was the most common test, performed in 41% (3161/7787) to 69% (19 659/28 684) of individuals before initiation across treatments. Between 11% (889/7787) and 59% (3613/6116) of patients had tuberculosis screening within 6 months before treatment, and 3% (149/4577) to 26% (1559/6097) had updated tests 1 year later. Between 13% (1006/7787) and 41% (16 728/40 965) had hepatitis panels before treatment. Low pretreatment testing levels before apremilast (15% [2331/16 116] to 45% [7253/16 116]) persisted a year into treatment (9% [816/8496] to 36% [2999/8496]) and were similar to dupilumab (11% [850/7787] to 41% [3161/7787] vs 3% [149/4577] to 25% [1160/4577]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this descriptive analysis of patients with CISDs starting systemic immunomodulatory treatment in the US, less than 60% received the recommended pretreatment testing. Additional research is required to understand whether variations in testing affect patient outcomes.

Real-World Tumor Response of Palbociclib in Combination With an Aromatase Inhibitor as First-Line Therapy in Pre/Perimenopausal Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Limited real-world data exist regarding the efficacy of palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy in pre/perimenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare real-world tumor responses among pre/perimenopausal women who initiated palbociclib plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or AI monotherapy as first-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study (NCT05012644) used electronic health record data from The US Oncology Network. Tumor responses were determined based on treating clinicians' assessments of radiologic evidence for changes in disease burden. Normalized inverse probability treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics between treatment cohorts. RESULTS: Of 196 pre/perimenopausal women, 116 and 80 were in the palbociclib plus AI cohort and AI cohort, respectively. Real-world response rates (complete or partial response) were 52.1% and 46.2%, respectively (odds ratio, 1.27 [95% confidence interval 0.72‒2.24]). Among patients with one or more tumor assessments on treatment, real-world response rates were 60.0% in the palbociclib plus AI cohort (n = 103) and 49.9% in the AI cohort (n = 71; odds ratio, 1.51 [95% confidence interval 0.82‒2.77]). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world analysis suggests that pre/perimenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer appear more likely to respond to palbociclib plus AI versus AI alone as first-line therapy, which may support the combination as a standard-of-care treatment for this patient population.

Palbociclib (Ibrance^®) is a medicine for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Metastatic means that the cancer has spread to other places in the body. Patients take palbociclib with hormone therapy, such as an aromatase inhibitor (AI). Palbociclib plus an AI is a treatment for a type of MBC called HR+/HER2‒ MBC. HR+/HER2‒ stands for hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative. Researchers wanted to observe responses to treatment in routine clinical practice among women with HR+/HER2­ MBC who had not reached menopause. A response is if a tumor shrinks or disappears after treatment. This study used healthcare information reported in electronic medical records of patients seen by doctors in The US Oncology Network. This study included 196 women with HR+/HER2­ MBC who had not reached menopause and had not received prior treatment for MBC. A total of 116 women received palbociclib plus an AI, and 80 women received an AI alone. Researchers used standard statistical approaches to balance baseline characteristics between the two treatment groups. These adjustments made the groups more similar so that researchers could compare treatment responses. Sixty percent of patients who took palbociclib plus an AI responded, compared with 50% of patients who took an AI alone. These results suggest that palbociclib plus an AI may benefit women with HR+/HER2‒ MBC who have not reached menopause.

Strong instrumental variables biased propensity scores in comparative effectiveness research: A case study in oncology.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Some medications require specific medical procedures in the weeks before their start. Such procedures may meet the definition of instrumental variables (IVs). We examined how they may influence treatment effect estimation in propensity score (PS)-adjusted comparative studies, and how to remedy. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Different covariate assessment periods (CAPs) did and did not include the month preceding treatment start were used to compute PS in the French claims database (Sytème National des Données de Santé-SNDS), and 1:1 match patients with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer initiating abiraterone acetate or docetaxel. The 36-month survival was assessed. RESULTS: Among 1, 213 docetaxel and 2, 442 abiraterone initiators, the PS distribution resulting from the CAP [-12; 0 months] distinctly separated populations (c = 0.93; 273 matched pairs). The CAPs [-12;-1 months] identified 765 pairs (c = 0.81). Strong docetaxel treatment predictors during the month before treatment start were implantable delivery systems (1% vs. 59%), which fulfilled IV conditions. The 36-month survival was not meaningfully different under the [-12; 0 months] CAP but differed by 10% points (38% vs. 28%) after excluding month -1. CONCLUSION: In the setting of highly predictive pretreatment procedures, excluding the immediate pre-exposure time from the CAP will reduce the risk of including potential IVs in PS models and may reduce bias.

The Aetion Coalition to Advance Real-World Evidence through Randomized Controlled Trial Emulation Initiative: Oncology.

Legislative and technological advancements over the past decade have given rise to the proliferation of healthcare data generated from routine clinical practice, often referred to as real-world data (RWD). These data have piqued the interest of healthcare stakeholders due to their potential utility in generating evidence to support clinical and regulatory decision making. In the oncology setting, studies leveraging RWD offer distinct advantages that are complementary to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). They also permit the conduct of investigations that may not be possible through prospective designs due to ethics or feasibility. Despite its promise, the use of RWD for the generation of clinical evidence remains controversial due to concerns of unmeasured confounding and other sources of bias that must be carefully addressed in the study design and analysis. To facilitate a better understanding of when RWD can provide reliable conclusions on drug effectiveness, we seek to conduct 10 RWD-based studies that emulate RCTs in oncology using a systematic, protocol-driven approach described herein. Results of this investigation will help inform clinical, scientific, and regulatory stakeholders on the applications of RWD in the context of product labeling expansion, drug safety, and comparative effectiveness in oncology.

Effectiveness research in oncology with electronic health record data: A retrospective cohort study emulating the PALOMA-2 trial.

PURPOSE: Oncology electronic health record (EHR) databases have increased in quality and availability over the past decade, yet it remains unclear whether these clinical practice data can be used to conduct reliable comparative effectiveness studies. We sought to emulate a clinical trial with EHR data in the advanced breast cancer population and compare our results against the trial. METHODS: This cohort study used EHR data from US oncology practices. All elements of the study were defined to mimic the PALOMA-2 trial as closely as possible. Patients with hormone-positive, HER-2 negative metastatic breast cancer with no prior treatment for metastatic disease were included. Patients initiating palbociclib and letrozole on the same day following the earliest record of metastasis were compared to those initiating letrozole only. The primary associational measure was the conditional hazard ratio for time-to-next treatment (TTNT). TTNT is well-measured in our data source and amenable for calibration against the randomized study results of the PALOMA-2 trial. We used multiple imputation for several patient characteristics with missing values. RESULTS: There were 3836 study-eligible women with advanced breast cancer. The hazard ratio for TTNT in the observational study (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.56-0.68) was closely aligned with that of the randomized trial (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.52-0.78). CONCLUSIONS: Under our assumptions on missing data and comparability of the two study populations, results from our non-randomized study closely matched that of the randomized trial. Further studies are needed to determine whether EHR data can yield reliable conclusions on treatment effects in oncology.

Oncology Drug Effectiveness from Electronic Health Record Data Calibrated Against RCT Evidence: The PARSIFAL Trial Emulation.

Background: The use of electronic health records (EHR) data to assess drug effectiveness in clinical oncology practice is of great interest to regulators, clinicians, and payers. However, the utility of EHR data in clinical effectiveness studies may be limited by missing data, unmeasured confounding, and imperfect outcome surveillance. This study sought to emulate and compare the results of a randomized controlled trial investigating the efficacy of palbociclib with fulvestrant vs letrozole in advanced breast cancer. Methods: This was a cohort study using longitudinal EHR data derived from outpatient oncology practices in the United States. Eligibility criteria from the PARSIFAL trial were emulated as closely as possible. Patients were included if they had hormone-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor - 2 (HER-2) negative metastatic breast cancer and had no record of prior treatment for metastatic disease. Patients initiating first-line treatment with palbociclib and fulvestrant following their first record of metastasis were compared to those initiating palbociclib and letrozole on the same day. Treatments were ascertained by oncology medication ordering records in the data source. The primary outcome was death as recorded in the oncologists' EHR systems. Results: There were 1886 eligible women in the study cohort. Although the 3-year survival was meaningfully lower in clinical practice (59%) compared to the randomized trial (78%), the relative effect size was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.07 (95% CI: 0.86-1.35), similar to the randomized trial (HR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.68-1.48). Conclusion: Despite common challenges encountered in EHR-based studies, it is possible to achieve similar conclusions to emulated randomized trials with the application of analytic approaches that address missing data, confounding, and selection bias. This is a promising finding in light of other emulations and ongoing efforts to improve data from clinical practice and causal analytics.

Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors and the Short-term Risk of Bladder Cancer: An International Multisite Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, compared with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) or dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, are associated with an increased risk of early bladder cancer events. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multisite, population-based, new-user, active comparator cohort study using the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Medicare fee-for-service, Optum's de-identifed Clinformatics Data Mart Database (CDM), and MarketScan Health databases from January 2013 through December 2020. We assembled two cohorts of adults with type 2 diabetes initiating 1) SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1RAs and 2) SGLT2 inhibitors or DPP-4 inhibitors. Cox proportional hazards models were fit to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of incident bladder cancer. The models were weighted using propensity score fine stratification. Site-specific HRs were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: SGLT2 inhibitor (n = 453,560) and GLP-1RA (n = 375,997) users had a median follow-up ranging from 1.5 to 2.2 years. Overall, SGLT2 inhibitors were not associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer compared with GLP-1RAs (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81-1.00). Similarly, when compared with DPP-4 inhibitors (n = 853,186), SGLT2 inhibitors (n = 347,059) were not associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91-1.09) over a median follow-up ranging from 1.6 to 2.6 years. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to previous randomized controlled trials, these findings indicate that the use of SGLT2 inhibitors is not associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer compared with GLP-1RAs or DPP-4 inhibitors. This should provide reassurance on the short-term effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on bladder cancer incidence.

Real-World Evidence Prediction of a Phase IV Oncology Trial: Comparative Degarelix vs Leuprolide Safety.

BACKGROUND: Medical and regulatory communities are increasingly interested in the utility of real-world evidence (RWE) for answering questions pertaining to drug safety and effectiveness but concerns about validity remain. A principled approach to conducting RWE studies may alleviate concerns and increase confidence in findings. This study sought to predict the findings from the PRONOUNCE trial using a principled approach to generating RWE. METHODS: This propensity-score (PS) matched observational cohort study utilized 3 claims databases to compare the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among initiators of degarelix vs. leuprolide. Patients were included if they had history of prostate cancer and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Subjects were excluded if they didn't have continuous database enrollment in the year prior to treatment initiation, were exposed to androgen deprivation therapy or experienced an acute cardiovascular event within 30 days prior to treatment initiation, or had a history or risk factors of QT prolongation. RESULTS: There were 12,448 leuprolide and 1,969 degarelix study-eligible patients before matching, with 1,887 in each arm after PS-matching. The results for MACE comparing degarelix to leuprolide in the observational analysis (hazard ratio= 1.35; 95% confidence interval = 0.94-1.93) was consistent with the subsequently released PRONOUNCE result (hazard ratio = 1.28; 95% confidence interval = 0.59-2.79). CONCLUSIONS: This study successfully predicted the result of a comparative cardiovascular safety trial in the oncology setting. Although the findings are encouraging, limitations of measuring cancer stage and tumor progression are representative of challenges in attempting to generalize whether claims-based RWE can be used as actionable evidence.

An algorithm to predict data completeness in oncology electronic medical records for comparative effectiveness research.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic health record (EHR) discontinuity (missing out-of-network encounters) can lead to information bias. We sought to construct an algorithm that identifies high EHR-continuity among oncology patients. METHODS: Using a linked Medicare-EHR database and regression, we sought to 1) measure how often Medicare claims for outpatient encounters were substantiated by visits recorded in the EHR, and 2) predict continuity ratio, defined as the yearly proportion of outpatient encounters reported to Medicare that were captured by EHR data. The prediction model...s performance was evaluated with the coefficient of determination and Spearman...s correlation. We quantified variable misclassification by decile of continuity ratio using standardized difference and sensitivity. RESULTS: A total of 79,678 subjects met all eligibility criteria. Predicted and observed continuity was highly correlated (σSpearman=0.86). On average across all variables measured, MSD was reduced by a factor of 1/7th and sensitivity was improved 35-fold comparing subjects in the highest vs. lowest decile of CR. CONCLUSION: In the oncology population, restricting EHR-based study cohorts to subjects with high continuity may reduce misclassification without greatly impacting representativeness. Further work is needed to elucidate the best manner of implementing continuity prediction rules in cohort studies.

Occurrence of inflammatory bowel disease in patients with chronic inflammatory skin diseases: a cohort study: Classification: Epidemiology.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have linked various chronic inflammatory skin diseases (CISDs) with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in a range of data sources with mixed conclusions. OBJECTIVES: We compared the incidence of IBD - ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn disease (CD) - in patients with a CISD vs. similar persons without a CISD. METHODS: In this cohort study using nationwide, longitudinal, commercial insurance claims data from the USA, we identified adults and children who were seen by a dermatologist between 2004 and 2020, and diagnosed with either psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata, vitiligo or hidradenitis suppurativa. Comparator patients were identified through risk-set sampling; they were eligible if they were seen by a dermatologist at least twice and not diagnosed with a CISD. Patient follow-up lasted until either IBD diagnosis, death, disenrolment or end of data stream, whichever came first. IBD events, UC or CD, were identified via validated algorithms: hospitalization or diagnosis with endoscopic confirmation. Incidence rates were computed before and after adjustment via propensity-score decile stratification to account for IBD risk factors. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated to compare the incidence of IBD in CISD vs. non-CISD. RESULTS: We identified patients with atopic dermatitis (n = 123 614), psoriasis (n = 83 049), alopecia areata (n = 18 135), vitiligo (n = 9003) or hidradenitis suppurativa (n = 6806), and comparator patients without a CISD (n = 2 376 120). During a median follow-up time of 718 days, and after applying propensity-score adjustment for IBD risk factors, we observed increased risk of both UC (HRUC 2·30, 95% CI 1·61-3·28) and CD (HRCD 2·70, 1·69-4·32) in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa, an increased risk of CD (HRCD 1·23, 1·03-1·46) but not UC (HRUC 1·01, 0·89-1·14) in psoriasis, and no increased risk of IBD in atopic dermatitis (HRUC 1·02, 0·92-1·12; HRCD 1·08, 0·94-1·23), alopecia areata (HRUC 1·18, 0·89-1·56; HRCD 1·26, 0·86-1·86) or vitiligo (HRUC 1·14, 0·77-1·68; HRCD 1·45, 0·87-2·41). CONCLUSIONS: IBD was increased in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa. CD alone was increased in patients with psoriasis. Neither UC nor CD was increased in patients with atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata or vitiligo. What is already known about this topic? Several studies have linked various chronic inflammatory skin diseases (CISDs) with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) utilizing a range of data sources, with mixed conclusions. What does this study add? This large-scale, claims-based cohort study expands current knowledge by providing background rates for IBD across multiple CISDs using consistent methods and within a single, nationally representative patient population. We observed a relative increased risk of IBD in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa, but the overall incidence rate difference of IBD was generally low. Crohn disease alone was significantly increased in patients with psoriasis, and neither ulcerative colitis nor Crohn disease was increased in patients with atopic dermatitis, vitiligo or alopecia areata.

Decreased risk of treatment failure with vedolizumab and thiopurines combined compared with vedolizumab monotherapy in Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVE: While infliximab combined to thiopurines is more effective than infliximab monotherapy in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and UC, the impact of adding thiopurines to vedolizumab remains controversial. We emulated two target trials comparing the effectiveness of combination therapy versus vedolizumab monotherapy in CD and UC. DESIGN: Based on two US and the French nationwide healthcare databases, patients with CD and UC who initiated vedolizumab were identified. The study methodology, including confounding adjustment and outcome definitions, were previously validated in successful emulations of the SONIC and SUCCESS trials. Risk ratios for treatment failure based on hospitalisation or surgery related to disease activity, treatment switch, or prolonged corticosteroids use, were estimated after 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching. RESULTS: Among a total of 10 299 vedolizumab users, 804 CD and 1088 UC pairs of combination therapy versus vedolizumab monotherapy users were PS matched. Treatment failure occurred at week 26 in 236 (29.3%) and 376 (34.3%) patients with CD and at week 16 in 236 (21.7%) and 263 (24.2%) patients with UC initiating combination therapy and vedolizumab monotherapy, respectively. The risk of treatment failure was decreased with combination therapy compared with vedolizumab monotherapy in CD (RR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.98) and to a lesser extent in UC (RR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.05). Findings were consistent across databases. CONCLUSION: Using validated methodologies, combination therapy with vedolizumab and thiopurines was associated with lower treatment failure compared with vedolizumab monotherapy in CD but not UC across the USA and France.

Comparative Risk of Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementia Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated With Targeted Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Agents.

Importance: Cytokine signaling, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and interleukin (IL)-6, through the Janus-kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway, was hypothesized to attenuate the risk of Alzheimer disease and related dementia (ADRD) in the Drug Repurposing for Effective Alzheimer Medicines (DREAM) initiative based on multiomics phenotyping. Objective: To evaluate the association between treatment with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or TNF inhibitors compared with abatacept and risk of incident ADRD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted among US Medicare fee-for-service patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged 65 years and older from 2007 to 2017. Patients were categorized into 3 cohorts based on initiation of tofacitinib (a JAK inhibitor), tocilizumab (an IL-6 inhibitor), or TNF inhibitors compared with a common comparator abatacept (a T-cell activation inhibitor). Analyses were conducted from August 2020 to August 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was onset of ADRD based on diagnosis codes evaluated in 4 alternative analysis schemes: (1) an as-treated follow-up approach, (2) an as-started follow-up approach incorporating a 6-month induction period, (3) incorporating a 6-month symptom to diagnosis period to account for misclassification of ADRD onset, and (4) identifying ADRD through symptomatic prescriptions and diagnosis codes. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were calculated from Cox proportional hazard regression after adjustment for 79 preexposure characteristics through propensity score matching. Results: After 1:1 propensity score matching to patients using abatacept, a total of 22 569 propensity score-matched patient pairs, including 4224 tofacitinib pairs (mean [SD] age 72.19 [5.65] years; 6945 [82.2%] women), 6369 tocilizumab pairs (mean [SD] age 72.01 [5.46] years; 10 105 [79.4%] women), and 11 976 TNF inhibitor pairs (mean [SD] age 72.67 [5.91] years; 19 710 [82.3%] women), were assessed. Incidence rates of ADRD varied from 2 to 18 per 1000 person-years across analyses schemes. There were no statistically significant associations of ADRD with tofacitinib (analysis 1: HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.55-1.51]; analysis 2: HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.53-1.13]; analysis 3: HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.72-2.33]; analysis 4: HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.21-1.20]), tocilizumab (analysis 1: HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.55-1.21]; analysis 2: HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.81-1.35]; analysis 3: HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.75-1.96]; analysis 4: HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.44-1.39]), or TNF inhibitors (analysis 1: HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.72-1.20]; analysis 2: HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.86-1.20]; analysis 3: HR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.86-1.48]; analysis 4: 0.90 [95% CI, 0.60-1.37]) compared with abatacept. Results from prespecified subgroup analysis by age, sex, and baseline cardiovascular disease were consistent except in patients with cardiovascular disease, for whom there was a potentially lower risk of ADRD with TNF inhibitors vs abatacept, but only in analyses 2 and 4 (analysis 1: HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.50-1.16]; analysis 2: HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.99]; analysis 3: HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.65-1.61]; analysis 4: HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.21-0.98]). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study did not find any association of risk of ADRD in patients treated with tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or TNF inhibitors compared with abatacept.

Risk of Serious Infections With Vedolizumab Versus Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonists in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The risk of serious infections associated with vedolizumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is uncertain. We assessed the risk of serious infections associated with use of vedolizumab versus anti-TNF in patients with IBD, according to IBD subtype and previous exposure to anti-TNF. METHODS: Based on two U.S. nationwide commercial insurance databases and the French nationwide health insurance database, anti-TNF naïve and experienced patients diagnosed with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) aged 18 years or older who initiated vedolizumab or an anti-TNF agent after 2010 were identified. Hazard ratios for serious infections comparing vedolizumab and anti-TNF were estimated in propensity score matched cohorts. RESULTS: Among 8768 vedolizumab and 26,656 anti-TNF initiators included after 1:4 variable ratio propensity score matching, 893 serious infections occurred during 37,725 person-years of follow-up. The risk of serious infections was not different between vedolizumab and anti-TNF in the overall IBD cohort (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0·79-1.13), while the risk was decreased for vedolizumab users in patients with UC (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.93), but not CD (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.87-1.38). In patients with UC, vedolizumab was consistently associated with lower risk of serious infections after exclusion of gastrointestinal infections (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: While the risk of serious infections associated with vedolizumab was not different compared to anti-TNF in the overall group of patients with IBD, the risk varied according to IBD subtype, by decreasing in patients with UC, but not CD. These findings may help to clarify the optimal position of vedolizumab in the therapeutic management of IBD.

Calibrating Real-World Evidence Studies Against Randomized Trials: Treatment Effectiveness of Infliximab in Crohn's Disease.

Real-world evidence (RWE) on the effectiveness of treatments in Crohn's disease (CD) derived from clinical practice data will help fill many evidence gaps left by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Emulating RCTs with healthcare database studies may calibrate RWE studies in CD. We aimed to emulate the SONIC trial on the effectiveness of infliximab in patients with CD using US and French healthcare claims data. SONIC had shown improved remission with combination therapy (i.e., infliximab plus thiopurines) compared with infliximab monotherapy. Using claims data (2004-2019) from commercially insured patients in the United States (IBM MarketScan and Optum) and France (Système National des Données de Santé (National Healthcare Data System) (SNDS)), we conducted a cohort study of patients with CD who initiated combination therapy and compared them with patients who initiated infliximab alone. The primary outcome was a composite end point of treatment failure including hospitalization or surgery related to CD, treatment switch, or continuation of corticosteroids 26 weeks after infliximab initiation. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated in propensity score (PS)-matched cohorts. We identified 1,437 PS-matched pairs of combination therapy vs. infliximab monotherapy users. As in SONIC, the risk of treatment failure was decreased with combination therapy in the overall cohort (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.62-0.82; RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97 in SONIC). Findings were consistent across MarketScan, Optum, and SNDS databases: RR (95% CI), 0.83 (0.63-1.10), 0.66 (0.46-0.93), and 0.68 (0.57-0.82), as well as component end points. These robust findings highlight opportunities in RWE analysis for studying treatment effectiveness in patients with CD in clinical practice.

Effectiveness of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor treatment versus renin-angiotensin system blockade in older adults with heart failure in clinical care.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) versus renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade alone in older adults with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: We conducted a cohort study using US Medicare fee-for-service claims data (2014-2017). Patients with HFrEF ≥65 years were identified in two cohorts: (1) initiators of ARNI or RAS blockade alone (ACE inhibitor, ACEI; or angiotensin receptor blocker, ARB) and (2) switchers from an ACEI to either ARNI or ARB. HR with 95% CI from Cox proportional hazard regression and 1-year restricted mean survival time (RMST) difference with 95% CI were calculated for a composite outcome of time to first worsening heart failure event or all-cause mortality after adjustment for 71 pre-exposure characteristics through propensity score fine-stratification weighting. All analyses of initiator and switcher cohorts were conducted separately and then combined using fixed effects. RESULTS: 51 208 patients with a mean age of 76 years were included, with 16 193 in the ARNI group. Adjusted HRs comparing ARNI with RAS blockade alone were 0.92 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.00) among initiators and 0.79 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.85) among switchers, with a combined estimate of 0.84 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.89). Adjusted 1-year RMST difference (95% CI) was 4 days in the initiator cohort (-1 to 9) and 12 days (8 to 17) in the switcher cohort, resulting in a pooled estimate of 9 days (6 to 12) favouring ARNI. CONCLUSION: ARNI treatment was associated with lower risk of a composite effectiveness endpoint compared with RAS blockade alone in older adults with HFrEF.

Single-arm oncology trials and the nature of external controls arms.

Aim: Single-arm trials with external control arms (ECAs) have gained popularity in oncology. ECAs may consist of primary data from previous trials, electronic health records (EHRs) or aggregate data from the literature. We sought to provide a description of how such studies achieve similarity of patients, comparability of data quality and outcome assessment. Materials & methods: In a stratified convenience sample of 15 studies, five used primary data from trials as ECAs, five used secondary data from EHRs and five used aggregate data from the literature. Data were collected from the published literature and public web resources, blinded to the eventual approval decision. Results: Studies using ECAs from primary data and EHR data displayed methods to achieve comparability of information, including matched baseline characteristics. Aggregate data from published studies did not attempt to match covariates. The EHR controls often showed calendar time overlap for collecting information while trial data were mostly historic. Outcome data were not consistently reported across studies. US FDA approval was only seen when primary data from trials or EHR data were used as the ECA, however no ECA in this sample directly contributed to approval. Discussion: In this nonsystematic review of ECAs for single-arm trials, the ECAs derived from primary data collected by other trials or EHRs show patterns of patient comparability, time overlap, and realistic methodological approaches to achieving balance between treatment arms. They are often submitted to regulators while literature-derived aggregate findings as ECA may serve as benchmarks for pipeline decisions.