Emulation of randomized trials of direct oral anticoagulants with claims data and implications for new Factor XI inhibitors.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) revolutionized the management of thromboembolic disorders. Clinical care may be further improved as Factor XIs undergo large-scale outcome trials. What role can non-randomized database studies play in expediting understanding of these drugs in clinical practice? The RCT-DUPLICATIVE Initiative emulated the design of eight DOAC randomized clinical trials (RCT) using non-randomized claims database studies. RCT study design parameters and measurements were closely emulated by the database studies and produced highly concordant results. The results of the single database study that did not meet all agreement metrics with the specific RCT it was emulating were aligned with a meta-analysis of six trials studying similar questions, suggesting the trial result was an outlier. Well-designed database studies using fit-for-purpose data came to the same conclusions as DOAC trials, illustrating how database studies could complement RCTs for Factor XI inhibitors-by accelerating insights in underrepresented populations, demonstrating effectiveness and safety in clinical practice, and testing broader indications.

Data Checks Before Registering Study Protocols for Health Care Database Analyses.

This Viewpoint discusses the challenges involved with secondary health care data collection vs primary data collection and provides a list of suggested data checks before registration of a study protocol using secondary data.

Targeted Learning with an Undersmoothed Lasso Propensity Score Model for Large-Scale Covariate Adjustment in Healthcare Database Studies.

Lasso regression is widely used for large-scale propensity score (PS) estimation in healthcare database studies. In these settings, previous work has shown that undersmoothing (overfitting) Lasso PS models can improve confounding control, but it can also cause problems of non-overlap in covariate distributions. It remains unclear how to select the degree of undersmoothing when fitting large-scale Lasso PS models to improve confounding control while avoiding issues that can result from reduced covariate overlap. Here, we used simulations to evaluate the performance of using collaborative-controlled targeted learning to data-adaptively select the degree of undersmoothing when fitting large-scale PS models within both singly and doubly robust frameworks to reduce bias in causal estimators. Simulations showed that collaborative learning can data-adaptively select the degree of undersmoothing to reduce bias in estimated treatment effects. Results further showed that when fitting undersmoothed Lasso PS-models, the use of cross-fitting was important for avoiding non-overlap in covariate distributions and reducing bias in causal estimates.

An open-source implementation of tree-based scan statistics.

PURPOSE: We develop an open-source R package to implement tree-based scan statistics (TBSS) analyses. METHODS: TBSS are data mining methods used by the United States Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control. They simultaneously screen thousands of hierarchically aggregated outcomes to identify unsuspected adverse effects of drugs or vaccines, accounting for multiple comparisons. The general structure of TBSS is highly adaptable, with four essential components: (1) a hierarchical outcome structure, (2) a test statistic to be computed for each element of the hierarchy, (3) an algorithm to generate data replicates under a null distribution, and (4) observed outcomes at the lower level of the hierarchy. We encode the general TBSS framework in a convenient R package that offers user-friendly functions for the most used TBSS methods. To illustrate the performance of our software, we evaluated two examples of archetypical TBSS analyses previously analyzed using proprietary, closed-source TreeScan™ software. The first considers the risk of congenital malformations associated with first-trimester exposure to valproate, and the second compares exposure to newly prescribed canagliflozin with a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor in adults affected by type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: The results of the original studies are replicated. CONCLUSIONS: The diffusion of an open-source implementation of TBSS can enhance innovation of TBSS methods and foster collaborations. We offer an intuitive R package implementing standard TBSS methods with accompanying tutorials. Our unified object-oriented implementation allows expert users to extend the framework, introduce new features, or enhance existing ones.

Design differences and variation in results between randomised trials and non-randomised emulations: meta-analysis of RCT-DUPLICATE data.

Objective: To explore how design emulation and population differences relate to variation in results between randomised controlled trials (RCT) and non-randomised real world evidence (RWE) studies, based on the RCT-DUPLICATE initiative (Randomised, Controlled Trials Duplicated Using Prospective Longitudinal Insurance Claims: Applying Techniques of Epidemiology). Design: Meta-analysis of RCT-DUPLICATE data. Data sources: Trials included in RCT-DUPLICATE, a demonstration project that emulated 32 randomised controlled trials using three real world data sources: Optum Clinformatics Data Mart, 2004-19; IBM MarketScan, 2003-17; and subsets of Medicare parts A, B, and D, 2009-17. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Trials where the primary analysis resulted in a hazard ratio; 29 RCT-RWE study pairs from RCT-DUPLICATE. Results: Differences and variation in effect sizes between the results from randomised controlled trials and real world evidence studies were investigated. Most of the heterogeneity in effect estimates between the RCT-RWE study pairs in this sample could be explained by three emulation differences in the meta-regression model: treatment started in hospital (which does not appear in health insurance claims data), discontinuation of some baseline treatments at randomisation (which would have been an unusual care decision in clinical practice), and delayed onset of drug effects (which would be under-reported in real world clinical practice because of the relatively short persistence of the treatment). Adding the three emulation differences to the meta-regression reduced heterogeneity from 1.9 to almost 1 (absence of heterogeneity). Conclusions: This analysis suggests that a substantial proportion of the observed variation between results from randomised controlled trials and real world evidence studies can be attributed to differences in design emulation.

The FAIRification of research in real-world evidence: A practical introduction to reproducible analytic workflows using Git and R.

Transparency and reproducibility are major prerequisites for conducting meaningful real-world evidence (RWE) studies that are fit for decision-making. Many advances have been made in the documentation and reporting of study protocols and results, but the principles for version control and sharing of analytic code in RWE are not yet as established as in other quantitative disciplines like computational biology and health informatics. In this practical tutorial, we aim to give an introduction to distributed version control systems (VCS) tailored toward the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reproducible) implementation of RWE studies. To ease adoption, we provide detailed step-by-step instructions with practical examples on how the Git VCS and R programming language can be implemented into RWE study workflows to facilitate reproducible analyzes. We further discuss and showcase how these tools can be used to track changes, collaborate, disseminate, and archive RWE studies through dedicated project repositories that maintain a complete audit trail of all relevant study documents.

High-Dose vs. Standard-Dose Influenza Vaccine and Cardiopulmonary Hospitalization or Mortality: Emulating the INVESTED Trial Using Insurance Claims Data.

The INVESTED trial did not show benefits of high-dose (HD) vaccine vs. standard-dose (SD) for a primary composite outcome of cardiopulmonary hospitalization or all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.96-1.15) and its components (all-cause mortality HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.84-1.21, cardiopulmonary hospitalization HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.96-1.16) during three influenza seasons (2016-2019) among participants with recent myocardial infarction or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). We emulated INVESTED using Medicare claims data to assess whether the real-world evidence (RWE) study reached similar conclusions. We identified 1:1 propensity score (PS)-matched trial-eligible Medicare beneficiaries aged > 65 years and with prior HHF who received an HD or SD vaccine for the 2016-2019 seasons. We also re-analyzed the INVESTED trial data restricting to participants > 65 years with prior HHF to align eligibility criteria more closely with the RWE study. We compared HRs from the trial and RWE study for the main outcomes. Among 53,393 pairs of PS-matched Medicare beneficiaries, the HD vaccine group showed lower risk of the primary composite outcome (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.95-0.98) and all-cause mortality (HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.91-0.95), and similar risk of cardiopulmonary hospitalization (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.96-1.00), compared with SD. The RWE and trial results were closely concordant after the trial population was limited to participants > 65 years with prior HHF: trial-based results for the primary composite outcome (HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.89-1.17), all-cause mortality (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.72-1.16), and cardiopulmonary hospitalization (HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.88-1.18). Although similar to the main trial results, the RWE was closer to the results from trial participants with aligned eligibility criteria. This study affirms the importance of considering different distributions of baseline patient characteristics when comparing trial findings to RWE.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Generic Versus Brand-Name Fluticasone-Salmeterol to Treat Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first generic maintenance inhaler for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The inhaler, Wixela Inhub (fluticasone-salmeterol; Viatris), is a substitutable version of the dry powder inhaler Advair Diskus (fluticasone-salmeterol; GlaxoSmithKline). When approving complex generic products like inhalers, the FDA applies a special "weight-of-evidence" approach. In this case, manufacturers were required to perform a randomized controlled trial in patients with asthma but not COPD, although the product received approval for both indications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of generic (Wixela Inhub) and brand-name (Advair Diskus) fluticasone-salmeterol among patients with COPD treated in routine care. DESIGN: A 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort study. SETTING: A large, longitudinal health care database. PATIENTS: Adults older than 40 years with a diagnosis of COPD. MEASUREMENTS: Incidence of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (effectiveness outcome) and incidence of first pneumonia hospitalization (safety outcome) in the 365 days after cohort entry. RESULTS: Among 45 369 patients (27 305 Advair Diskus users and 18 064 Wixela Inhub users), 10 012 matched pairs were identified for the primary analysis. Compared with Advair Diskus use, Wixela Inhub use was associated with a nearly identical incidence of first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.04]) and first pneumonia hospitalization (HR, 0.99 [CI, 0.86 to 1.15]). LIMITATIONS: Follow-up times were short, reflecting real-world clinical practice. The possibility of residual confounding cannot be completely excluded. CONCLUSION: Use of generic and brand-name fluticasone-salmeterol was associated with similar outcomes among patients with COPD treated in routine practice. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Comparison of EHR Data-Completeness in Patients with Different Types of Medical Insurance Coverage in the United States.

Prior studies have demonstrated that misclassification of study variables due to electronic health record (EHR)-discontinuity can be mitigated by restricting EHR-based analyses to subjects with high predicted EHR-continuity based on a simple algorithm. In this study, we compared EHR continuity in populations covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or commercial insurance. Using claims-linked EHRs from a multicenter network in Massachusetts, including Medicare (MA EHR-Medicare cohort) and Medicaid (MA EHR-Medicaid cohort) claims data; and TriNetX (TriNetX cohort) claims-linked EHR data from 11 US-based healthcare organizations, we assessed (1) EHR-continuity quantified by proportion of encounters captured by EHR (capture proportion (CP)); (2) area under receiver operating curve (AUROC) of previously validated model to identify patients with high EHR-continuity (CP ≥ 0.6); (3) misclassification of 40 patient characteristics, quantified by average standardized absolute mean difference (ASAMD). Study participants were ≥ 65 years (Medicare) or ≥ 18 years (Medicaid, TriNetX) with ≥ 365 days of continuous insurance enrollment overlapping with an EHR encounter. We found that the mean CP was 0.30, 0.18, and 0.19 and AUROC of the prediction model to identify patients with high EHR-continuity was 0.92, 0.89, and 0.77 in the MA EHR-Medicare, MA EHR-Medicaid, and TriNetX cohorts, respectively. Restricting to patients with predicted EHR-continuity percentile of top 20%, 50%, and 50% in MA EHR-Medicare, MA EHR-Medicaid, and TriNetX cohorts resulted in acceptable levels of misclassification (ASAMD < 0.1). Using a prediction model to identify cohorts with high EHR-continuity can improve validity, but cutoffs to achieve this goal vary by population.

DESIGN DIFFERENCES EXPLAIN VARIATION IN RESULTS BETWEEN RANDOMIZED TRIALS AND THEIR NON-RANDOMIZED EMULATIONS.

Objectives: While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered a standard for evidence on the efficacy of medical treatments, non-randomized real-world evidence (RWE) studies using data from health insurance claims or electronic health records can provide important complementary evidence. The use of RWE to inform decision-making has been questioned because of concerns regarding confounding in non-randomized studies and the use of secondary data. RCT-DUPLICATE was a demonstration project that emulated the design of 32 RCTs with non-randomized RWE studies. We sought to explore how emulation differences relate to variation in results between the RCT-RWE study pairs. Methods: We include all RCT-RWE study pairs from RCT-DUPLICATE where the measure of effect was a hazard ratio and use exploratory meta-regression methods to explain differences and variation in the effect sizes between the results from the RCT and the RWE study. The considered explanatory variables are related to design and population differences. Results: Most of the observed variation in effect estimates between RCT-RWE study pairs in this sample could be explained by three emulation differences in the meta-regression model: (i) in-hospital start of treatment (not observed in claims data), (ii) discontinuation of certain baseline therapies at randomization (not part of clinical practice), (iii) delayed onset of drug effects (missed by short medication persistence in clinical practice). Conclusions: This analysis suggests that a substantial proportion of the observed variation between results from RCTs and RWE studies can be attributed to design emulation differences. (238 words).

Predicting Treatment Effects of a New-to-Market Drug in Clinical Practice Based on Phase III Randomized Trial Results.

Trial results may not be generalizable to target populations treated in clinical practice with different distributions of baseline characteristics that modify the treatment effect. We used outcome models developed with trial data to predict treatment effects in Medicare populations. We used data from the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy trial (RE-LY), which investigated the effect of dabigatran vs. warfarin on stroke or systemic embolism (stroke/SE) among patients with atrial fibrillation. We developed outcome models by fitting proportional hazards models in trial data. Target populations were trial-eligible Medicare beneficiaries who initiated dabigatran or warfarin in 2010-2011 ("early") and 2010-2017 ("extended"). We predicted 2-year risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for stroke/SE, major bleeding, and all-cause death in the Medicare populations using the observed baseline characteristics. The trial and early target populations had similar mean (SD) CHADS2 scores (2.15 (SD 1.13) vs. 2.15 (SD 0.91)) but different mean ages (71 vs. 79 years). Compared with RE-LY, the early Medicare population had similar predicted benefit of dabigatran vs. warfarin for stroke/SE (trial RR = 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.50 to 0.76 and RD = -1.37%, -1.96% to -0.77%, Medicare RR = 0.73, 0.65 to 0.82 and RD = -0.92%, -1.26% to -0.59%) and risks for major bleeding and all-cause death. The time-extended target population showed similar results. Outcome model-based prediction facilitates estimating the average treatment effects of a drug in different target populations when treatment and outcome data are unreliable or unavailable. The predicted effects may inform payers' coverage decisions for patients, especially shortly after a drug's launch when observational data are scarce.

Use of Electronic Health Record Data for Drug Safety Signal Identification: A Scoping Review.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacovigilance programs protect patient health and safety by identifying adverse event signals through postmarketing surveillance of claims data and spontaneous reports. Electronic health records (EHRs) provide new opportunities to address limitations of traditional approaches and promote discovery-oriented pharmacovigilance. METHODS: To evaluate the current state of EHR-based medication safety signal identification, we conducted a scoping literature review of studies aimed at identifying safety signals from routinely collected patient-level EHR data. We extracted information on study design, EHR data elements utilized, analytic methods employed, drugs and outcomes evaluated, and key statistical and data analysis choices. RESULTS: We identified 81 eligible studies. Disproportionality methods were the predominant analytic approach, followed by data mining and regression. Variability in study design makes direct comparisons difficult. Studies varied widely in terms of data, confounding adjustment, and statistical considerations. CONCLUSION: Despite broad interest in utilizing EHRs for safety signal identification, current efforts fail to leverage the full breadth and depth of available data or to rigorously control for confounding. The development of best practices and application of common data models would promote the expansion of EHR-based pharmacovigilance.

Emulation of Randomized Clinical Trials With Nonrandomized Database Analyses: Results of 32 Clinical Trials.

Importance: Nonrandomized studies using insurance claims databases can be analyzed to produce real-world evidence on the effectiveness of medical products. Given the lack of baseline randomization and measurement issues, concerns exist about whether such studies produce unbiased treatment effect estimates. Objective: To emulate the design of 30 completed and 2 ongoing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of medications with database studies using observational analogues of the RCT design parameters (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, time [PICOT]) and to quantify agreement in RCT-database study pairs. Design, Setting, and Participants: New-user cohort studies with propensity score matching using 3 US claims databases (Optum Clinformatics, MarketScan, and Medicare). Inclusion-exclusion criteria for each database study were prespecified to emulate the corresponding RCT. RCTs were explicitly selected based on feasibility, including power, key confounders, and end points more likely to be emulated with real-world data. All 32 protocols were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov before conducting analyses. Emulations were conducted from 2017 through 2022. Exposures: Therapies for multiple clinical conditions were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: Database study emulations focused on the primary outcome of the corresponding RCT. Findings of database studies were compared with RCTs using predefined metrics, including Pearson correlation coefficients and binary metrics based on statistical significance agreement, estimate agreement, and standardized difference. Results: In these highly selected RCTs, the overall observed agreement between the RCT and the database emulation results was a Pearson correlation of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.64-0.91), with 75% meeting statistical significance, 66% estimate agreement, and 75% standardized difference agreement. In a post hoc analysis limited to 16 RCTs with closer emulation of trial design and measurements, concordance was higher (Pearson r, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97; 94% meeting statistical significance, 88% estimate agreement, 88% standardized difference agreement). Weaker concordance occurred among 16 RCTs for which close emulation of certain design elements that define the research question (PICOT) with data from insurance claims was not possible (Pearson r, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.00-0.83; 56% meeting statistical significance, 50% estimate agreement, 69% standardized difference agreement). Conclusions and Relevance: Real-world evidence studies can reach similar conclusions as RCTs when design and measurements can be closely emulated, but this may be difficult to achieve. Concordance in results varied depending on the agreement metric. Emulation differences, chance, and residual confounding can contribute to divergence in results and are difficult to disentangle.

The Impact of Longitudinal Data-Completeness of Electronic Health Record Data on the Prediction Performance of Clinical Risk Scores.

The impact of electronic health record (EHR) discontinuity (i.e., receiving care outside of a given EHR system) on EHR-based risk prediction is unknown. We aimed to assess the impact of EHR-continuity on the performance of clinical risk scores. The study cohort consisted of patients aged ≥ 65 years with ≥ 1 EHR encounter in the 2 networks in Massachusetts (MA; 2007/1/1-2017/12/31, internal training and validation dataset), and one network in North Carolina (NC; 2007/1/1-2016/12/31, external validation dataset) that were linked with Medicare claims data. Risk scores were calculated using EHR data alone vs. linked EHR-claims data (not subject to misclassification due to EHR-discontinuity): (i) combined comorbidity score (CCS), (ii) claim-based frailty score (CFI), (iii) CHAD2 DS2 -VASc, and (iv) Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding, Labile, Elderly, and Drugs (HAS-BLED). We assessed the performance of CCS and CFI predicting death, CHAD2 DS2 -VASc predicting ischemic stroke, and HAS-BLED predicting bleeding by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), stratified by quartiles of predicted EHR-continuity (Q1-4). There were 319,740 patients in the MA systems and 125,380 in the NC system. In the external validation dataset, AUROC for EHR-based CCS predicting 1-year risk of death was 0.583 in Q1 (lowest) EHR-continuity group, which increased to 0.739 in Q4 (highest) EHR-continuity group. The corresponding improvement in AUROC was 0.539 to 0.647 for CFI, 0.556 to 0.637 for CHAD2 DS2 -VASc, and 0.517 to 0.556 for HAS-BLED. The AUROC in Q4 EHR-continuity group based on EHR alone approximates that based on EHR-claims data. The prediction performance of four clinical risk scores was substantially worse in patients with lower vs. high EHR-continuity.

HARmonized Protocol Template to Enhance Reproducibility of hypothesis evaluating real-world evidence studies on treatment effects: A good practices report of a joint ISPE/ISPOR task force.

PROBLEM: Ambiguity in communication of key study parameters limits the utility of real-world evidence (RWE) studies in healthcare decision-making. Clear communication about data provenance, design, analysis, and implementation is needed. This would facilitate reproducibility, replication in independent data, and assessment of potential sources of bias. WHAT WE DID: The International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) and ISPOR-The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) convened a joint task force, including representation from key international stakeholders, to create a harmonized protocol template for RWE studies that evaluate a treatment effect and are intended to inform decision-making. The template builds on existing efforts to improve transparency and incorporates recent insights regarding the level of detail needed to enable RWE study reproducibility. The overarching principle was to reach for sufficient clarity regarding data, design, analysis, and implementation to achieve 3 main goals. One, to help investigators thoroughly consider, then document their choices and rationale for key study parameters that define the causal question (e.g., target estimand), two, to facilitate decision-making by enabling reviewers to readily assess potential for biases related to these choices, and three, to facilitate reproducibility. STRATEGIES TO DISSEMINATE AND FACILITATE USE: Recognizing that the impact of this harmonized template relies on uptake, we have outlined a plan to introduce and pilot the template with key international stakeholders over the next 2 years. CONCLUSION: The HARmonized Protocol Template to Enhance Reproducibility (HARPER) helps to create a shared understanding of intended scientific decisions through a common text, tabular and visual structure. The template provides a set of core recommendations for clear and reproducible RWE study protocols and is intended to be used as a backbone throughout the research process from developing a valid study protocol, to registration, through implementation and reporting on those implementation decisions.

Prospective validation of a dynamic prognostic model for identifying COVID-19 patients at high risk of rapid deterioration.

BACKGROUND: We sought to develop and prospectively validate a dynamic model that incorporates changes in biomarkers to predict rapid clinical deterioration in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: We established a retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients aged ≥18 years with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 using electronic health records (EHR) from a large integrated care delivery network in Massachusetts including >40 facilities from March to November 2020. A total of 71 factors, including time-varying vital signs and laboratory findings during hospitalization were screened. We used elastic net regression and tree-based scan statistics for variable selection to predict rapid deterioration, defined as progression by two levels of a published severity scale in the next 24 h. The development cohort included the first 70% of patients identified chronologically in calendar time; the latter 30% served as the validation cohort. A cut-off point was estimated to alert clinicians of high risk of imminent clinical deterioration. RESULTS: Overall, 3706 patients (2587 in the development and 1119 in the validation cohort) met the eligibility criteria with a median of 6 days of follow-up. Twenty-four variables were selected in the final model, including 16 dynamic changes of laboratory results or vital signs. Area under the ROC curve was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.79-0.82) in the development set and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71-0.78) in the validation set. The model was well calibrated (slope = 0.84 and intercept = -0.07 on the calibration plot in the validation set). The estimated cut-off point, with a positive predictive value of 83%, was 0.78. CONCLUSIONS: Our prospectively validated dynamic prognostic model demonstrated temporal generalizability in a rapidly evolving pandemic and can be used to inform day-to-day treatment and resource allocation decisions based on dynamic changes in biophysiological factors.