Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A post-hoc analysis of the RACING trial.

AIM: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this post-hoc subgroup analysis of the RACING trial, patients were analysed based on the presence of MetS. MetS was defined as meeting at least three of the five following criteria: (a) elevated waist circumference; (b) elevated triglycerides; (c) reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; (d) elevated blood pressure; and (e) elevated fasting glucose. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke. RESULTS: Of the 3780 patients enrolled in the RACING trial, 1703 (45.1%) had MetS at baseline. The primary outcome rate was 10.1% and 10.3% in patients with MetS receiving ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval = 0.72-1.32; p = .868). Lower rates of intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction (3.9% vs. 8.0%; p < .001) and lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (57 vs. 65 mg/dl; p < .001) were observed with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy. Furthermore, the rate of new-onset diabetes was 18.5% and 19.1% in each group (p = .822). There were no significant interactions between MetS and therapy regarding study outcomes in the total population. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MetS and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy had comparable cardiovascular benefits with those of high-intensity statin monotherapy. Meanwhile, ezetimibe combination therapy was associated with lower drug intolerance and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, but there was no apparent between-group difference in new-onset diabetes.

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.

Patient-Friendly Discharge Summaries in Korea Based on ChatGPT: Software Development and Validation.

BACKGROUND: Although discharge summaries in patient-friendly language can enhance patient comprehension and satisfaction, they can also increase medical staff workload. Using a large language model, we developed and validated software that generates a patient-friendly discharge summary. METHODS: We developed and tested the software using 100 discharge summary documents, 50 for patients with myocardial infarction and 50 for patients treated in the Department of General Surgery. For each document, three new summaries were generated using three different prompting methods (Zero-shot, One-shot, and Few-shot) and graded using a 5-point Likert Scale regarding factuality, comprehensiveness, usability, ease, and fluency. We compared the effects of different prompting methods and assessed the relationship between input length and output quality. RESULTS: The mean overall scores differed across prompting methods (4.19 ± 0.36 in Few-shot, 4.11 ± 0.36 in One-shot, and 3.73 ± 0.44 in Zero-shot; P < 0.001). Post-hoc analysis indicated that the scores were higher with Few-shot and One-shot prompts than in zero-shot prompts, whereas there was no significant difference between Few-shot and One-shot prompts. The overall proportion of outputs that scored ≥ 4 was 77.0% (95% confidence interval: 68.8-85.3%), 70.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61.0-79.0%), and 32.0% (95% CI, 22.9-41.1%) with Few-shot, One-shot, and Zero-shot prompts, respectively. The mean factuality score was 4.19 ± 0.60 with Few-shot, 4.20 ± 0.55 with One-shot, and 3.82 ± 0.57 with Zero-shot prompts. Input length and the overall score showed negative correlations in the Zero-shot (r = -0.437, P < 0.001) and One-shot (r = -0.327, P < 0.001) tests but not in the Few-shot (r = -0.050, P = 0.625) tests. CONCLUSION: Large-language models utilizing Few-shot prompts generally produce acceptable discharge summaries without significant misinformation. Our research highlights the potential of such models in creating patient-friendly discharge summaries for Korean patients to support patient-centered care.

Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe vs. high-intensity statin in patients with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the RACING trial.

AIMS: This study evaluated the effect of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a pre-specified, stratified subgroup analysis of the DM cohort in the RACING trial. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke. Among total patients, 1398 (37.0%) had DM at baseline. The incidence of the primary outcome was 10.0% and 11.3% among patients with DM randomized to ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.22; P = 0.460). Intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug was observed in 5.2% and 8.7% of patients in each group, respectively (P = 0.014). LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 81.0%, 83.1%, and 79.9% of patients in the ezetimibe combination therapy group, and 64.1%, 70.2%, and 66.8% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all P < 0.001). In the total population, no significant interactions were found between DM status and therapy regarding primary outcome, intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction, and the proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL. CONCLUSION: Ezetimibe combination therapy effects observed in the RACING trial population are preserved among patients with DM. This study supports moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy as a suitable alternative to high-intensity statins if the latter cannot be tolerated, or further reduction in LDL cholesterol is required among patients with DM and ASCVD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier:NCT03044665.

Real-world data emulating randomized controlled trials of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Emulating randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by real-world evidence (RWE) studies would benefit future clinical and regulatory decision-making by balancing the limitations of RCT. We aimed to evaluate whether the findings from RWE studies can support regulatory decisions derived from RCTs of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). METHODS: Five landmark trials (AMPLIFY, RE-COVER II, Hokusai-VTE, EINSTEIN-DVT, and EINSTEIN-PE) of NOACs were emulated using the South Korean nationwide claims database (January 2012 to August 2020). We applied an active comparator and new-user design to include patients who initiated oral anticoagulants within 28 days from their VTE diagnoses. The prespecified eligibility criteria, exposure (each NOAC, such as apixaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban), comparator (conventional therapy, defined as subcutaneous heparin followed by warfarin), and the definition of outcomes from RCTs were emulated as closely as possible in each separate emulation cohort. The primary outcome was identical to each trial, which was defined as recurrent VTE or VTE-related death. The safety outcome was major bleeding. Propensity score matching was conducted to balance 69 covariates between the exposure groups. Effect estimates for outcomes were estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel method and Cox proportional hazards model and subsequently compared with the corresponding RCT estimates. RESULTS: Compared to trial populations, real-world study populations were older (range: 63-69 years [RWE] vs. 54-59 years [RCT]), with more females (55-60.5% vs. 39-48.3%) and had a higher prevalence of active cancer (4.2-15.4% vs. 2.5-9.5%). The emulated estimates for effectiveness outcomes showed superior effectiveness of NOAC (AMPLIFY: relative risk 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.94; RE-COVER II: hazard ratio [HR] 0.60, 0.37-0.96; Hokusai-VTE: 0.49, 0.31-0.78; EINSTEIN-DVT: 0.54, 0.33-0.89; EINSTEIN-PE: 0.50, 0.34-0.74), when contrasted with trials that showed non-inferiority. For safety outcomes, all emulations except for AMPLIFY and EINSTEIN-DVT yielded results consistent with their corresponding RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the feasibility of complementing RCTs with RWE studies by using claims data in patients with VTE. Future studies to consider the different demographic characteristics between RCT and RWE populations are needed.

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.

Association of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors with post-discharge outcomes in patients with acute heart failure with type 2 diabetes: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Given the cumulative evidence on the effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) on chronic heart failure, demand is emerging for further information on their effects in patients who are hospitalized for acute heart failure. However, there is still limited evidence about the class effect of SGLT2is on acute heart failure. We investigated whether initiating treatment with SGLT2is after an episode of acute heart failure reduces the risks of post-discharge heart failure readmission or cardiovascular mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes who hospitalized for heart failure, using Korean Health Insurance Review & Assessment database (2015-2020). The exposure was defined as initiation of SGLT2is during hospitalization or at discharge. We assessed hazards of post-discharge heart failure readmission and cardiovascular death at 1-year, and 30-, 60-, and 90-day from the date of discharge in the SGLT2is users and non-users. Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Among 56,343 patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for heart failure, 29,290 patients were included in the study cohort (mean [SD] age, 74.1 [10.8] years; 56.1% women); 818 patients (2.8%) were prescribed SGLT2is during index hospitalization or at discharge. Patients with a prescription for SGLT2i vs. those without prescription had lower rates of heart failure readmission or cardiovascular death at 1 year (22.4% vs. 25.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.90 [95% confidence interval, 0.87-0.93]), and also at 30 days (7.0% vs. 7.7%%; 0.74 [0.69-0.79]). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes, initiating SGLT2i treatment after an episode of acute heart failure was significantly associated with a reduced combined risk of heart failure readmission and cardiovascular mortality in a nationwide cohort reflecting routine clinical practice.

Safety of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors on amputation across categories of baseline cardiovascular disease and diuretics use in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To assess the risk of amputation associated with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) among patients with type 2 diabetes, across categories of baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diuretic use (DU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an active comparator, new-user cohort study using Korea's nationwide claims data (2015-2020). The study cohort consisted of patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated SGLT2is or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is). Cohort entry was defined by first prescription date. We then classified patients into four discrete subcohorts based on their baseline status of CVD and DU as (1) CVD+/DU+, (2) CVD+/DU-, (3) CVD-/DU+ and (4) CVD-/DU-. We performed 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching within each cohort and estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of amputation with SGLT2is versus DPP4is using Cox models. RESULTS: We identified 219 900 PS-matched pairs of SGLT2is and DPP4is (CVD+/DU+, n = 11 719; CVD+/DU-, n = 26 092; CVD-/DU+, n = 26 894; and CVD-/DU-, n = 155 195), with well-balanced baseline covariates across all cohorts. Significantly lower risks of amputation with SGLT2is versus DPP4is were found in CVD+/DU+ (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14-0.90), CVD+/DU- (0.45, 0.21-0.99) and CVD-/DU- (0.48, 0.33-0.70), but not in CVD-/DU+ (0.54, 0.26-1.12). Consistent trends in estimates were found across various sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating SGLT2is against DPP4is did not increase the risk of amputation across patient populations of varying vulnerability. These findings based on routine practice will reassure clinicians of the safety of SGLT2is with regard to amputation risk in selected high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes.

Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with and without asthma from the United States, South Korea, and Europe.

Objective: Large international comparisons describing the clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 are limited. The aim of the study was to perform a large-scale descriptive characterization of COVID-19 patients with asthma.Methods: We included nine databases contributing data from January to June 2020 from the US, South Korea (KR), Spain, UK and the Netherlands. We defined two cohorts of COVID-19 patients ('diagnosed' and 'hospitalized') based on COVID-19 disease codes. We followed patients from COVID-19 index date to 30 days or death. We performed descriptive analysis and reported the frequency of characteristics and outcomes in people with asthma defined by codes and prescriptions.Results: The diagnosed and hospitalized cohorts contained 666,933 and 159,552 COVID-19 patients respectively. Exacerbation in people with asthma was recorded in 1.6-8.6% of patients at presentation. Asthma prevalence ranged from 6.2% (95% CI 5.7-6.8) to 18.5% (95% CI 18.2-18.8) in the diagnosed cohort and 5.2% (95% CI 4.0-6.8) to 20.5% (95% CI 18.6-22.6) in the hospitalized cohort. Asthma patients with COVID-19 had high prevalence of comorbidity including hypertension, heart disease, diabetes and obesity. Mortality ranged from 2.1% (95% CI 1.8-2.4) to 16.9% (95% CI 13.8-20.5) and similar or lower compared to COVID-19 patients without asthma. Acute respiratory distress syndrome occurred in 15-30% of hospitalized COVID-19 asthma patients.Conclusion: The prevalence of asthma among COVID-19 patients varies internationally. Asthma patients with COVID-19 have high comorbidity. The prevalence of asthma exacerbation at presentation was low. Whilst mortality was similar among COVID-19 patients with and without asthma, this could be confounded by differences in clinical characteristics. Further research could help identify high-risk asthma patients.[Box: see text]Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2021.2025392 .

Early Rhythm Control Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Low-Risk Patients : A Nationwide Propensity Score-Weighted Study.

BACKGROUND: Rhythm control is associated with lower risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared with usual care among patients recently diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF) with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of approximately 2 or greater in EAST-AFNET 4 (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial). OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the results can be generalized to patients with low stroke risk. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Nationwide claims database of the Korean National Health Insurance Service. PARTICIPANTS: 54 216 patients with AF having early rhythm control (antiarrhythmic drugs or ablation) or rate control therapy that was initiated within 1 year of the AF diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS: The effect of early rhythm control on the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death, ischemic stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or myocardial infarction was compared between eligible and ineligible patients for EAST-AFNET 4 (CHA2DS2-VASc score, approximately 0 to 1) using propensity overlap weighting. RESULTS: In total, 37 557 study participants (69.3%) were eligible for the trial (median age, 70 years; median CHA2DS2-VASc score, 4), among whom early rhythm control was associated with lower risk for the primary composite outcome than rate control (hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.92]). Among the 16 659 low-risk patients (30.7%) who did not meet the inclusion criteria (median age, 54 years; median CHA2DS2-VASc score, 1), early rhythm control was consistently associated with lower risk for the primary outcome (hazard ratio, 0.81 [CI, 0.66 to 0.98]). No significant differences in safety outcomes were found between the rhythm and rate control strategies regardless of trial eligibility. LIMITATION: Residual confounding. CONCLUSION: In routine clinical practice, the beneficial association between early rhythm control and cardiovascular complications was consistent among low-risk patients regardless of trial eligibility. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Ministry of Health and Welfare and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, Republic of Korea.

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.

Association of rhythm control with incident dementia among patients with atrial fibrillation: a nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) increases the risk of dementia, and catheter ablation of AF may be associated with a lower risk of dementia. We investigated the association of a rhythm-control strategy for AF with the risk of dementia, compared with a rate-control strategy. METHODS: This population-based cohort study included 41,135 patients with AF on anticoagulation who were newly treated with rhythm-control (anti-arrhythmic drugs or ablation) or rate-control strategies between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2015 from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. The primary outcome was all-cause dementia, which was compared using propensity score overlap weighting. RESULTS: In the study population (46.7% female; median age: 68 years), a total of 4,039 patients were diagnosed with dementia during a median follow-up of 51.7 months. Rhythm control, compared with rate control, was associated with decreased dementia risk (weighted incidence rate: 21.2 versus 25.2 per 1,000 person-years; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.93). The associations between rhythm control and decreased dementia risk were consistently observed even after censoring for incident stroke (sHR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97) and were more pronounced in relatively younger patients and those with lower CHA2DS2-VASc scores. Among dementia subtypes, rhythm control was associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer's disease (sHR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Among anticoagulated patients with AF, rhythm control was associated with a lower risk of dementia, compared with rate control. Initiating rhythm control in AF patients with fewer stroke risk factors might help prevent subsequent dementia.

Perceived Risk of Re-Identification in OMOP-CDM Database: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: The advancement of information technology has immensely increased the quality and volume of health data. This has led to an increase in observational study, as well as to the threat of privacy invasion. Recently, a distributed research network based on the common data model (CDM) has emerged, enabling collaborative international medical research without sharing patient-level data. Although the CDM database for each institution is built inside a firewall, the risk of re-identification requires management. Hence, this study aims to elucidate the perceptions CDM users have towards CDM and risk management for re-identification. METHODS: The survey, targeted to answer specific in-depth questions on CDM, was conducted from October to November 2020. We targeted well-experienced researchers who actively use CDM. Basic statistics (total number and percent) were computed for all covariates. RESULTS: There were 33 valid respondents. Of these, 43.8% suggested additional anonymization was unnecessary beyond, "minimum cell count" policy, which obscures a cell with a value lower than certain number (usually 5) in shared results to minimize the liability of re-identification due to rare conditions. During extract-transform-load processes, 81.8% of respondents assumed structured data is under control from the risk of re-identification. However, respondents noted that date of birth and death were highly re-identifiable information. The majority of respondents (n = 22, 66.7%) conceded the possibility of identifier-contained unstructured data in the NOTE table. CONCLUSION: Overall, CDM users generally attributed high reliability for privacy protection to the intrinsic nature of CDM. There was little demand for additional de-identification methods. However, unstructured data in the CDM were suspected to have risks. The necessity for a coordinating consortium to define and manage the re-identification risk of CDM was urged.

Association between proton pump inhibitor use and gastric cancer: a population-based cohort study using two different types of nationwide databases in Korea.

OBJECTIVE: The association between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and gastric cancer related to Helicobacter pylori eradication has not been fully investigated in geographical regions with high risk of gastric cancer. We aimed to evaluate the association between PPIs and gastric cancer in Korea. DESIGN: This study analysed the original and common data model versions of the Korean National Health Insurance Service database from 2002 to 2013. We compared the incidence rates of gastric cancer after 1-year drug exposure, between new users of PPIs and other drugs excluding PPIs, by Cox proportional hazards model. We also analysed the incidence of gastric cancer among PPI users after H. pylori eradication. RESULTS: The analysis included 11 741 patients in matched PPI and non-PPI cohorts after large-scale propensity score matching. During a median follow-up of 4.3 years, PPI use was associated with a 2.37-fold increased incidence of gastric cancer (PPI≥30 days vs non-PPI; 118/51 813 person-years vs 40/49 729 person-years; HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.56 to 3.68, p=0.001). The incidence rates of gastric cancer showed an increasing trend parallel to the duration of PPI use. In H. pylori-eradicated subjects, the incidence of gastric cancer was significantly associated with PPI use over 180 days compared with the non-PPI group (PPI≥180 days vs non-PPI; 30/12 470 person-years vs 9/7814 person-years; HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.05 to 4.67, p=0.036). CONCLUSION: PPI use was associated with gastric cancer, regardless of H. pylori eradication status. Long-term PPIs should be used with caution in high-risk regions for gastric cancer.

Risk of depression, suicide and psychosis with hydroxychloroquine treatment for rheumatoid arthritis: a multinational network cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Concern has been raised in the rheumatology community regarding recent regulatory warnings that HCQ used in the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic could cause acute psychiatric events. We aimed to study whether there is risk of incident depression, suicidal ideation or psychosis associated with HCQ as used for RA. METHODS: We performed a new-user cohort study using claims and electronic medical records from 10 sources and 3 countries (Germany, UK and USA). RA patients ≥18 years of age and initiating HCQ were compared with those initiating SSZ (active comparator) and followed up in the short (30 days) and long term (on treatment). Study outcomes included depression, suicide/suicidal ideation and hospitalization for psychosis. Propensity score stratification and calibration using negative control outcomes were used to address confounding. Cox models were fitted to estimate database-specific calibrated hazard ratios (HRs), with estimates pooled where I2 <40%. RESULTS: A total of 918 144 and 290 383 users of HCQ and SSZ, respectively, were included. No consistent risk of psychiatric events was observed with short-term HCQ (compared with SSZ) use, with meta-analytic HRs of 0.96 (95% CI 0.79, 1.16) for depression, 0.94 (95% CI 0.49, 1.77) for suicide/suicidal ideation and 1.03 (95% CI 0.66, 1.60) for psychosis. No consistent long-term risk was seen, with meta-analytic HRs of 0.94 (95% CI 0.71, 1.26) for depression, 0.77 (95% CI 0.56, 1.07) for suicide/suicidal ideation and 0.99 (95% CI 0.72, 1.35) for psychosis. CONCLUSION: HCQ as used to treat RA does not appear to increase the risk of depression, suicide/suicidal ideation or psychosis compared with SSZ. No effects were seen in the short or long term. Use at a higher dose or for different indications needs further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with EU PAS (reference no. EUPAS34497; http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm? id=34498). The full study protocol and analysis source code can be found at https://github.com/ohdsi-studies/Covid19EstimationHydroxychloroquine2.

COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases: characteristics and outcomes in a multinational network of cohorts across three countries.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with autoimmune diseases were advised to shield to avoid coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but information on their prognosis is lacking. We characterized 30-day outcomes and mortality after hospitalization with COVID-19 among patients with prevalent autoimmune diseases, and compared outcomes after hospital admissions among similar patients with seasonal influenza. METHODS: A multinational network cohort study was conducted using electronic health records data from Columbia University Irving Medical Center [USA, Optum (USA), Department of Veterans Affairs (USA), Information System for Research in Primary Care-Hospitalization Linked Data (Spain) and claims data from IQVIA Open Claims (USA) and Health Insurance and Review Assessment (South Korea). All patients with prevalent autoimmune diseases, diagnosed and/or hospitalized between January and June 2020 with COVID-19, and similar patients hospitalized with influenza in 2017-18 were included. Outcomes were death and complications within 30 days of hospitalization. RESULTS: We studied 133 589 patients diagnosed and 48 418 hospitalized with COVID-19 with prevalent autoimmune diseases. Most patients were female, aged ≥50 years with previous comorbidities. The prevalence of hypertension (45.5-93.2%), chronic kidney disease (14.0-52.7%) and heart disease (29.0-83.8%) was higher in hospitalized vs diagnosed patients with COVID-19. Compared with 70 660 hospitalized with influenza, those admitted with COVID-19 had more respiratory complications including pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome, and higher 30-day mortality (2.2-4.3% vs 6.32-24.6%). CONCLUSION: Compared with influenza, COVID-19 is a more severe disease, leading to more complications and higher mortality.

Comprehensive comparative effectiveness and safety of first-line antihypertensive drug classes: a systematic, multinational, large-scale analysis.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty remains about the optimal monotherapy for hypertension, with current guidelines recommending any primary agent among the first-line drug classes thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, in the absence of comorbid indications. Randomised trials have not further refined this choice. METHODS: We developed a comprehensive framework for real-world evidence that enables comparative effectiveness and safety evaluation across many drugs and outcomes from observational data encompassing millions of patients, while minimising inherent bias. Using this framework, we did a systematic, large-scale study under a new-user cohort design to estimate the relative risks of three primary (acute myocardial infarction, hospitalisation for heart failure, and stroke) and six secondary effectiveness and 46 safety outcomes comparing all first-line classes across a global network of six administrative claims and three electronic health record databases. The framework addressed residual confounding, publication bias, and p-hacking using large-scale propensity adjustment, a large set of control outcomes, and full disclosure of hypotheses tested. FINDINGS: Using 4·9 million patients, we generated 22 000 calibrated, propensity-score-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) comparing all classes and outcomes across databases. Most estimates revealed no effectiveness differences between classes; however, thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics showed better primary effectiveness than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: acute myocardial infarction (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·75-0·95), hospitalisation for heart failure (0·83, 0·74-0·95), and stroke (0·83, 0·74-0·95) risk while on initial treatment. Safety profiles also favoured thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. The non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers were significantly inferior to the other four classes. INTERPRETATION: This comprehensive framework introduces a new way of doing observational health-care science at scale. The approach supports equivalence between drug classes for initiating monotherapy for hypertension-in keeping with current guidelines, with the exception of thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics superiority to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and the inferiority of non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers. FUNDING: US National Science Foundation, US National Institutes of Health, Janssen Research & Development, IQVIA, South Korean Ministry of Health & Welfare, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

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.