A Principled Approach to Characterize and Analyze Partially Observed Confounder Data from Electronic Health Records.

Objective: Partially observed confounder data pose challenges to the statistical analysis of electronic health records (EHR) and systematic assessments of potentially underlying missingness mechanisms are lacking. We aimed to provide a principled approach to empirically characterize missing data processes and investigate performance of analytic methods. Methods: Three empirical sub-cohorts of diabetic SGLT2 or DPP4-inhibitor initiators with complete information on HbA1c, BMI and smoking as confounders of interest (COI) formed the basis of data simulation under a plasmode framework. A true null treatment effect, including the COI in the outcome generation model, and four missingness mechanisms for the COI were simulated: completely at random (MCAR), at random (MAR), and two not at random (MNAR) mechanisms, where missingness was dependent on an unmeasured confounder and on the value of the COI itself. We evaluated the ability of three groups of diagnostics to differentiate between mechanisms: 1)-differences in characteristics between patients with or without the observed COI (using averaged standardized mean differences [ASMD]), 2)-predictive ability of the missingness indicator based on observed covariates, and 3)-association of the missingness indicator with the outcome. We then compared analytic methods including "complete case", inverse probability weighting, single and multiple imputation in their ability to recover true treatment effects. Results: The diagnostics successfully identified characteristic patterns of simulated missingness mechanisms. For MAR, but not MCAR, the patient characteristics showed substantial differences (median ASMD 0.20 vs 0.05) and consequently, discrimination of the prediction models for missingness was also higher (0.59 vs 0.50). For MNAR, but not MAR or MCAR, missingness was significantly associated with the outcome even in models adjusting for other observed covariates. Comparing analytic methods, multiple imputation using a random forest algorithm resulted in the lowest root-mean-squared-error. Conclusion: Principled diagnostics provided reliable insights into missingness mechanisms. When assumptions allow, multiple imputation with nonparametric models could help reduce bias.

smdi: an R package to perform structural missing data investigations on partially observed confounders in real-world evidence studies.

Objectives: Partially observed confounder data pose a major challenge in statistical analyses aimed to inform causal inference using electronic health records (EHRs). While analytic approaches such as imputation are available, assumptions on underlying missingness patterns and mechanisms must be verified. We aimed to develop a toolkit to streamline missing data diagnostics to guide choice of analytic approaches based on meeting necessary assumptions. Materials and methods: We developed the smdi (structural missing data investigations) R package based on results of a previous simulation study which considered structural assumptions of common missing data mechanisms in EHR. Results: smdi enables users to run principled missing data investigations on partially observed confounders and implement functions to visualize, describe, and infer potential missingness patterns and mechanisms based on observed data. Conclusions: The smdi R package is freely available on CRAN and can provide valuable insights into underlying missingness patterns and mechanisms and thereby help improve the robustness of real-world evidence studies.

Risk of Arterial and Venous Thrombotic Events Among Patients with COVID-19: A Multi-National Collaboration of Regulatory Agencies from Canada, Europe, and United States.

Purpose: Few studies have examined how the absolute risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 has evolved over time across different countries. Researchers from the European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration established a collaboration to evaluate the absolute risk of arterial (ATE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the 90 days after diagnosis of COVID-19 in the ambulatory (eg, outpatient, emergency department, nursing facility) setting from seven countries across North America (Canada, US) and Europe (England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain) within periods before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability. Patients and Methods: We conducted cohort studies of patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting from the seven specified countries. Patients were followed for 90 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcomes were ATE and VTE over 90 days from diagnosis date. We measured country-level estimates of 90-day absolute risk (with 95% confidence intervals) of ATE and VTE. Results: The seven cohorts included 1,061,565 patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting before COVID-19 vaccines were available (through November 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.11% (0.09-0.13%) in Canada to 1.01% (0.97-1.05%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.23% (0.21-0.26%) in Canada to 0.84% (0.80-0.89%) in England. The seven cohorts included 3,544,062 patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (beginning December 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.06% (0.06-0.07%) in England to 1.04% (1.01-1.06%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.25% (0.24-0.26%) in England to 1.02% (0.99-1.04%) in the US. Conclusion: There was heterogeneity by country in 90-day absolute risk of ATE and VTE after ambulatory COVID-19 diagnosis both before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability.

Risk of admission to hospital with arterial or venous thromboembolism among patients diagnosed in the ambulatory setting with covid-19 compared with influenza: retrospective cohort study.

Objective: To measure the 90 day risk of arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism among patients diagnosed with covid-19 in the ambulatory (ie, outpatient, emergency department, or institutional) setting during periods before and during covid-19 vaccine availability and compare results to patients with ambulatory diagnosed influenza. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Four integrated health systems and two national health insurers in the US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System. Participants: Patients with ambulatory diagnosed covid-19 when vaccines were unavailable in the US (period 1, 1 April-30 November 2020; n=272 065) and when vaccines were available in the US (period 2, 1 December 2020-31 May 2021; n=342 103), and patients with ambulatory diagnosed influenza (1 October 2018-30 April 2019; n=118 618). Main outcome measures: Arterial thromboembolism (hospital diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke) and venous thromboembolism (hospital diagnosis of acute deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) within 90 days after ambulatory covid-19 or influenza diagnosis. We developed propensity scores to account for differences between the cohorts and used weighted Cox regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios of outcomes with 95% confidence intervals for covid-19 during periods 1 and 2 versus influenza. Results: 90 day absolute risk of arterial thromboembolism with covid-19 was 1.01% (95% confidence interval 0.97% to 1.05%) during period 1, 1.06% (1.03% to 1.10%) during period 2, and with influenza was 0.45% (0.41% to 0.49%). The risk of arterial thromboembolism was higher for patients with covid-19 during period 1 (adjusted hazard ratio 1.53 (95% confidence interval 1.38 to 1.69)) and period 2 (1.69 (1.53 to 1.86)) than for patients with influenza. 90 day absolute risk of venous thromboembolism with covid-19 was 0.73% (0.70% to 0.77%) during period 1, 0.88% (0.84 to 0.91%) during period 2, and with influenza was 0.18% (0.16% to 0.21%). Risk of venous thromboembolism was higher with covid-19 during period 1 (adjusted hazard ratio 2.86 (2.46 to 3.32)) and period 2 (3.56 (3.08 to 4.12)) than with influenza. Conclusions: Patients diagnosed with covid-19 in the ambulatory setting had a higher 90 day risk of admission to hospital with arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism both before and after covid-19 vaccine availability compared with patients with influenza.

A cohort study to assess risk of cutaneous small vessel vasculitis among users of different oral anticoagulants.

PURPOSE: Cutaneous small vessel vasculitis (CSVV) was identified as a safety signal among patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). This study aimed to determine if CSVV risk differed among patients with atrial fibrillation (Afib) who newly initiated warfarin or a DOAC. METHODS: We identified enrollees aged ≥21 years diagnosed with Afib who newly initiated rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban, and warfarin in the Sentinel Distributed Database from October 19, 2010 to February 29, 2020. We selected and followed patients who did not have evidence of the following in the 183 days prior to initiating treatment: CSVV diagnosis, dispensing of other study drugs, select autoimmune diseases or autoimmune medications, cancer diagnoses or chemotherapeutic treatment, kidney dialysis or transplant, alternative anticoagulation indications, or an institutional (nursing home, hospice, hospital) stay on the treatment initiation date (index date) until CSVV outcome or pre-specified censoring. We conducted 1:1 propensity score matching in six comparisons. RESULTS: CSVV incidence rates for DOACs and warfarin ranged from 3.3 to 5.6 per 10 000-person years in our matched Afib population. The adjusted CSVV hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was 0.94 (0.64, 1.39) for rivaroxaban versus warfarin; 1.17 (0.67, 2.06) for dabigatran vs. warfarin; 0.85 (0.62, 1.16) for apixaban vs. warfarin; 0.86 (0.49, 1.50) for rivaroxaban vs. dabigatran; 0.99 (0.68, 1.45) for rivaroxaban versus apixaban; and 1.70 (0.90, 3.21) for dabigatran versus apixaban. CONCLUSION: We did not find significant evidence of differential CSVV risk in pair-wise comparisons of DOACs and warfarin.

Association of COVID-19 vs Influenza With Risk of Arterial and Venous Thrombotic Events Among Hospitalized Patients.

Importance: The incidence of arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism in persons with COVID-19 remains unclear. Objective: To measure the 90-day risk of arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 before or during COVID-19 vaccine availability vs patients hospitalized with influenza. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of 41 443 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (April-November 2020), 44 194 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (December 2020-May 2021), and 8269 patients hospitalized with influenza (October 2018-April 2019) in the US Food and Drug Administration Sentinel System (data from 2 national health insurers and 4 regional integrated health systems). Exposures: COVID-19 or influenza (identified by hospital diagnosis or nucleic acid test). Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital diagnosis of arterial thromboembolism (acute myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke) and venous thromboembolism (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) within 90 days. Outcomes were ascertained through July 2019 for patients with influenza and through August 2021 for patients with COVID-19. Propensity scores with fine stratification were developed to account for differences between the influenza and COVID-19 cohorts. Weighted Cox regression was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes during each COVID-19 vaccine availability period vs the influenza period. Results: A total of 85 637 patients with COVID-19 (mean age, 72 [SD, 13.0] years; 50.5% were male) and 8269 with influenza (mean age, 72 [SD, 13.3] years; 45.0% were male) were included. The 90-day absolute risk of arterial thromboembolism was 14.4% (95% CI, 13.6%-15.2%) in patients with influenza vs 15.8% (95% CI, 15.5%-16.2%) in patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (risk difference, 1.4% [95% CI, 1.0%-2.3%]) and 16.3% (95% CI, 16.0%-16.6%) in patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (risk difference, 1.9% [95% CI, 1.1%-2.7%]). Compared with patients with influenza, the risk of arterial thromboembolism was not significantly higher among patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.97-1.11]) or during vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.00-1.14]). The 90-day absolute risk of venous thromboembolism was 5.3% (95% CI, 4.9%-5.8%) in patients with influenza vs 9.5% (95% CI, 9.2%-9.7%) in patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (risk difference, 4.1% [95% CI, 3.6%-4.7%]) and 10.9% (95% CI, 10.6%-11.1%) in patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (risk difference, 5.5% [95% CI, 5.0%-6.1%]). Compared with patients with influenza, the risk of venous thromboembolism was significantly higher among patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.43-1.79]) and during vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.68-2.12]). Conclusions and Relevance: Based on data from a US public health surveillance system, hospitalization with COVID-19 before and during vaccine availability, vs hospitalization with influenza in 2018-2019, was significantly associated with a higher risk of venous thromboembolism within 90 days, but there was no significant difference in the risk of arterial thromboembolism within 90 days.

Association of Fluoroquinolones With the Risk of Aortic Aneurysm or Aortic Dissection.

Importance: Previous observational studies have suggested that fluoroquinolones are associated with aortic aneurysm or dissection, but these studies may be subject to confounding by indication or surveillance bias. Objective: To assess the association of fluoroquinolones with risk of aortic aneurysm or aortic dissection (AA/AD) while accounting for potential confounding by fluoroquinolone indication and bias owing to differential surveillance. Design, Setting, and Participants: In an observational cohort study using a US commercial claims database, 2 pairwise 1:1 propensity score-matched cohorts were identified: patients aged 50 years or older with a diagnosis of pneumonia 3 days or less before initiating treatment with a fluoroquinolone or azithromycin and patients aged 50 years or older with a urinary tract infection (UTI) diagnosis 3 days or less before initiating a fluoroquinolone or combined trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated controlling for 85 baseline confounders. In a secondary analysis, patients receiving fluoroquinolones were compared with those receiving amoxicillin, both with and without considering baseline aortic imaging, to address differences in detection of AA/AD before antibiotic use. Data on patients within the database from January 1, 2003, through September 30, 2015, were analyzed. Data analysis was conducted from July 23, 2019, to July 6, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalization for AA/AD occurring within 60 days following treatment initiation. Results: After propensity score matching, patient characteristics were well balanced, with 279 554 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.66 [10.93] years; 149 976 women [53.6%]) in the pneumonia cohort and 948 364 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.06 [10.33] years; 823 667 women [86.9%]) in the UTI cohort. Initiators of fluoroquinolones (n = 139 772 pairs in the pneumonia cohort and n = 474 182 pairs in the UTI cohort) had an increased rate of AA/AD compared with initiators of azithromycin (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.36-4.86; incidence, 0.03% for fluoroquinolones vs 0.01% for azithromycin) but no increased rate compared with initiators of combined trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.62-1.57; incidence, <0.01% in both UTI groups). Secondary analysis using amoxicillin as a comparator (n = 3 976 162 pairs) produced results consistent with those from earlier studies (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.33-1.79; incidence, <0.01% in both groups). Requiring baseline imaging in this cohort (n = 542 649 pairs) to address surveillance bias attenuated the increased rate (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.96-1.33; incidence, 0.06% for fluoroquinolones vs 0.05% for amoxicillin). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this nationwide cohort study of adults with pneumonia or UTI suggest an increased relative rate of AA/AD associated with fluoroquinolones within the pneumonia cohort but not within the UTI cohort. In both cohorts, the absolute rate of AA/AD appeared to be low (<0.1%). The increased relative rate observed in the pneumonia cohort may be due to residual confounding or surveillance bias.

Improving measurement of binary covariates in claims data: A simulation study.

PURPOSE: When investigators have two claims-based definitions for a binary confounder, it is unclear whether to prefer the more sensitive or more specific definition. Our objective was to compare adjusting for the sensitive or specific definition alone vs two novel approaches combining both definitions: a "two-algorithm indicator" and a "two-algorithm restriction" approach. METHODS: Each simulated patient had a binary exposure, outcome, and confounder. We created two nested, misclassified versions of the confounder using validated heart failure definitions. The sensitive definition had a sensitivity/specificity of 0.98/0.83, while the specific definition had a sensitivity/specificity of 0.77/0.99. Patients were classified into 3 groups: group 0 did not meet either definition, group 1 met the sensitive but not specific definition, and group 2 met both. The two-algorithm indicator approach adjusted using indicators for groups 1 and 2, while the two-algorithm restriction approach excluded patients in group 1 and adjusted using an indicator for group 2. Adjusted exposure odds ratios (ORs) were estimated for each approach using logistic regression. RESULTS: The crude OR was 1.33 (95% CI, 1.07-1.63). Adjusting for the specific or sensitive definitions resulted in ORs of 1.09 (95% CI, 0.87-1.35) and 1.14 (95% CI, 0.91-1.40). The two-algorithm indicator method returned an OR of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.86-1.33). The two-algorithm restriction approach returned an OR of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.79-1.29) but excluded 20% of the cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The two-algorithm indicator approach may improve adjustment for claims-based confounders by returning a point estimate at least as unbiased as the better of the two component definitions.

Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants and Angioedema: A Cohort and Case-Crossover Study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients taking non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban have reported experiencing angioedema in randomized trials and routine care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify the association between NOACs and angioedema relative to warfarin among routinely treated patients with atrial fibrillation in a cohort study. We also compared warfarin users with non-users in a case-crossover study. METHODS: We utilized a cohort design that drew eligible patients from the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial database, the Optum© Clinformatics® Data Mart, and Medicare. Within each database, we compared the 6-month relative rate of angioedema among new users of NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) and new users of warfarin. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) after adjusting for confounders using propensity score stratification, and meta-analyzed the database-specific HRs using a random-effects model. We also estimated an odds ratio (OR) for the association between warfarin and angioedema using a case-crossover design, a self-controlled design that controls for time-invariant confounders. RESULTS: In the cohort study, we observed 249 incident angioedema events among 267,681 NOAC initiators and 281,143 warfarin initiators across all databases. The meta-analyzed HR for angioedema comparing any NOAC versus warfarin was 0.98 (95% CI 0.76-1.27). In the case-crossover design, the OR for the association between warfarin and angioedema was 0.91 (95% CI 0.68-1.21) based on 431 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Our estimates were inconsistent with substantial short-term relative increases in the rate of angioedema associated with oral anticoagulant therapy.

Comparative effectiveness of generic and brand-name medication use: A database study of US health insurance claims.

BACKGROUND: To the extent that outcomes are mediated through negative perceptions of generics (the nocebo effect), observational studies comparing brand-name and generic drugs are susceptible to bias favoring the brand-name drugs. We used authorized generic (AG) products, which are identical in composition and appearance to brand-name products but are marketed as generics, as a control group to address this bias in an evaluation aiming to compare the effectiveness of generic versus brand medications. METHODS AND FINDINGS: For commercial health insurance enrollees from the US, administrative claims data were derived from 2 databases: (1) Optum Clinformatics Data Mart (years: 2004-2013) and (2) Truven MarketScan (years: 2003-2015). For a total of 8 drug products, the following groups were compared using a cohort study design: (1) patients switching from brand-name products to AGs versus generics, and patients initiating treatment with AGs versus generics, where AG use proxied brand-name use, addressing negative perception bias, and (2) patients initiating generic versus brand-name products (bias-prone direct comparison) and patients initiating AG versus brand-name products (negative control). Using Cox proportional hazards regression after 1:1 propensity-score matching, we compared a composite cardiovascular endpoint (for amlodipine, amlodipine-benazepril, and quinapril), non-vertebral fracture (for alendronate and calcitonin), psychiatric hospitalization rate (for sertraline and escitalopram), and insulin initiation (for glipizide) between the groups. Inverse variance meta-analytic methods were used to pool adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for each comparison between the 2 databases. Across 8 products, 2,264,774 matched pairs of patients were included in the comparisons of AGs versus generics. A majority (12 out of 16) of the clinical endpoint estimates showed similar outcomes between AGs and generics. Among the other 4 estimates that did have significantly different outcomes, 3 suggested improved outcomes with generics and 1 favored AGs (patients switching from amlodipine brand-name: HR [95% CI] 0.92 [0.88-0.97]). The comparison between generic and brand-name initiators involved 1,313,161 matched pairs, and no differences in outcomes were noted for alendronate, calcitonin, glipizide, or quinapril. We observed a lower risk of the composite cardiovascular endpoint with generics versus brand-name products for amlodipine and amlodipine-benazepril (HR [95% CI]: 0.91 [0.84-0.99] and 0.84 [0.76-0.94], respectively). For escitalopram and sertraline, we observed higher rates of psychiatric hospitalizations with generics (HR [95% CI]: 1.05 [1.01-1.10] and 1.07 [1.01-1.14], respectively). The negative control comparisons also indicated potentially higher rates of similar magnitude with AG compared to brand-name initiation for escitalopram and sertraline (HR [95% CI]: 1.06 [0.98-1.13] and 1.11 [1.05-1.18], respectively), suggesting that the differences observed between brand and generic users in these outcomes are likely explained by either residual confounding or generic perception bias. Limitations of this study include potential residual confounding due to the unavailability of certain clinical parameters in administrative claims data and the inability to evaluate surrogate outcomes, such as immediate changes in blood pressure, upon switching from brand products to generics. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that use of generics was associated with comparable clinical outcomes to use of brand-name products. These results could help in promoting educational interventions aimed at increasing patient and provider confidence in the ability of generic medicines to manage chronic diseases.

Quantifying bias reduction with fixed-duration versus all-available covariate assessment periods.

PURPOSE: Implementing a cohort study in longitudinal healthcare databases requires looking back over some covariate assessment period (CAP) preceding cohort entry to measure confounders. We used simulations to compare fixed-duration versus all-available CAPs for confounder adjustment in the presence of differences in available baseline time between exposure groups. METHODS: We simulated cohorts of 10 000 patients with binary variables for a single confounder, exposure, and outcome. Baseline time was simulated based on the observed distribution in a claims-based comparison of statin users versus nonusers. We compared bias after measuring confounders using fixed-duration and all-available CAPs, both when exposure groups had similar and discrepant amounts of available baseline time. RESULTS: When the comparison groups had similar amounts of baseline time, an all-available CAP was less biased than a fixed-duration CAP. When baseline time differed between comparison groups, the preferable CAP approach depended on the direction of confounding and which exposure group had higher covariate sensitivity. These findings were consistent in direction across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: In certain settings of differential available baseline time between exposure groups, the all-available CAP was more biased than the fixed-duration CAP. The relative directions and strengths of confounding and misclassification biases are an important consideration when choosing between a fixed-duration or all-available CAP, but they are often unknown. Therefore, we recommend comparing the amount of available baseline time between exposure groups. When there is a large discrepancy, despite appropriate design choices, we recommend a fixed-duration approach to avoid potential increases in bias because of differential data availability.

Effect of Lawyer-Submitted Reports on Signals of Disproportional Reporting in the Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System.

INTRODUCTION: Lawyer-submitted reports may have unintended consequences on safety signal detection in spontaneous adverse event reporting systems. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess the impact of lawyer-submitted reports primarily for one adverse event (AE) on the ability to detect a signal of disproportional reporting for another AE for the same drug in the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). METHODS: FAERS reports from January 2004 to September 2015 were used to estimate yearly cumulative proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for three known drug-AE pairs-isotretinoin-birth defects, atorvastatin-rhabdomyolysis, and rosuvastatin-rhabdomyolysis-with and without lawyer-submitted reports. Isotretinoin and atorvastatin have been the subject of high-profile tort litigation regarding other AEs. A lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of one or more based on three or more reports defined a signal. RESULTS: Cumulative PRRs met signaling criteria in all analyses. For isotretinoin, lawyer-submitted reports increased PRRs for birth defects before 2008, with the largest increase in 2006 (2.9 [95% CI 2.4-3.5] to 3.3 [95% CI 2.8-3.9]); lawyer-submitted reports decreased PRRs for birth defects after 2011, with the largest decrease in 2013 (2.2 [95% CI 2.0-2.5] to 1.9 [95% CI 1.7-2.1]). For atorvastatin, lawyer-submitted reports reduced PRRs for rhabdomyolysis after 2013, with the largest decrease in 2015 (18.0 [95% CI 17.1-19.1] to 15.4 [95% CI 14.5-16.2]). Lawyer-submitted reports had little impact on PRRs for rosuvastatin and rhabdomyolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion of lawyer-submitted reports in FAERS did not meaningfully distort known safety signals for two drugs subject to high-profile tort litigation for other AEs.

Development and application of two semi-automated tools for targeted medical product surveillance in a distributed data network.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: An important component of the Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel Initiative is the active post-market risk identification and analysis (ARIA) system, which utilizes semi-automated, parameterized computer programs to implement propensity-score adjusted and self-controlled risk interval designs to conduct targeted surveillance of medical products in the Sentinel Distributed Database. In this manuscript, we review literature relevant to the development of these programs and describe their application within the Sentinel Initiative. RECENT FINDINGS: These quality-checked and publicly available tools have been successfully used to conduct rapid, replicable, and targeted safety analyses of several medical products. In addition to speed and reproducibility, use of semi-automated tools allows investigators to focus on decisions regarding key methodological parameters. We also identified challenges associated with the use of these methods in distributed and prospective datasets like the Sentinel Distributed Database, namely uncertainty regarding the optimal approach to estimating propensity scores in dynamic data among data partners of heterogeneous size. SUMMARY: Future research should focus on the methodological challenges raised by these applications as well as developing new modular programs for targeted surveillance of medical products.

Comparison of Calipers for Matching on the Disease Risk Score.

Previous studies have compared calipers for propensity score (PS) matching, but none have considered calipers for matching on the disease risk score (DRS). We used Medicare claims data to perform 3 cohort studies of medication initiators: a study of raloxifene versus alendronate in 1-year nonvertebral fracture risk, a study of cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors versus nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medications in 6-month gastrointestinal bleeding, and a study of simvastatin + ezetimibe versus simvastatin alone in 6-month cardiovascular outcomes. The study periods for each cohort were 1998 through 2005, 1999 through 2002, and 2004 through 2005, respectively. In each cohort, we calculated 1) a DRS, 2) a prognostic PS which included the DRS as the independent variable in a PS model, and 3) the PS for each patient. We then nearest-neighbor matched on each score in a variable ratio and a fixed ratio within 8 calipers based on the standard deviation of the logit and the natural score scale. When variable ratio matching on the DRS, a caliper of 0.05 on the natural scale performed poorly when the outcome was rare. The prognostic PS did not appear to offer any consistent practical benefits over matching on the DRS directly. In general, logit-based calipers or calipers smaller than 0.05 on the natural scale performed well when DRS matching in all examples.

Thiazolidinediones and Parkinson Disease: A Cohort Study.

Thiazolidinediones, a class of medications indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, reduce inflammation and have been shown to provide a therapeutic benefit in animal models of Parkinson disease. We examined the association between treatment with thiazolidinediones and the onset of Parkinson disease in older individuals. We performed a cohort study of 29,397 Medicare patients enrolled in state pharmaceutical benefits programs who initiated treatment with thiazolidinediones or sulfonylureas during the years 1997 through 2005 and had no prior diagnosis of Parkinson disease. New users of thiazolidinediones were propensity score matched to new users of sulfonylureas and followed to determine whether they were diagnosed with Parkinson disease. We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare time to diagnosis of Parkinson disease in the propensity score-matched populations. To assess the association with duration of use, we performed several analyses that required longer continuous use of medications. In the primary analysis, thiazolidinedione users had a hazard ratio for a diagnosis of Parkinson disease of 1.09 (95% confidence interval: 0.71, 1.66) when compared with sulfonylurea users. Increasing the duration-of-use requirements to 10 months did not substantially change the association; the hazard ratios ranged from 1.00 (95% confidence interval: 0.49, 2.05) to 1.17 (95% confidence interval: 0.60, 2.25). Thiazolidinedione use was not associated with a longer time to diagnosis of Parkinson disease than was sulfonylurea use, regardless of duration of exposure.

Metabolic monitoring for youths initiating use of second-generation antipsychotics, 2003-2011.

OBJECTIVE: In 2004, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) released treatment guidelines recommending metabolic screening for children and adolescents before and after initiation of second-generation antipsychotics. Prior studies showed that the guidelines coincided with a small increase in glucose testing of children and adults but had limited follow-up. This study sought to evaluate changes in metabolic screening of children initiating second-generation antipsychotics around the time of the 2004 guidelines and in the following eight years. METHODS: Study patients (N=52,407) were identified in a large nationwide commercial insurance claims database for the period January 1, 2003, through December 31, 2011. The study population was a cohort of nondiabetic new users of second-generation antipsychotics who were ages 5-18. Glucose and HbA1c tests completed before and after second-generation antipsychotic initiation were identified with Current Procedural Terminology-4 codes. Metabolic screening was also examined by second-generation antipsychotic agent prescribed and psychiatric diagnosis. RESULTS: The proportion of patients receiving a glucose test preinitiation increased from 17.9% in 2003 to 18.9% in 2004, and testing postinitiation increased from 14.7% to 16.6% in the same period. The slight increase in glucose testing was not sustained; the proportion tested dropped in the following years before rising again in 2008. Glucose screening was most common for patients taking aripiprazole. Patients with a diagnosis of hyperkinetic disorder were less likely to be tested. HbA1c testing was less frequent but had a similar usage pattern. CONCLUSIONS: The small improvement in metabolic screening immediately after the 2004 ADA guidelines were issued was not sustained. Overall, metabolic screening rates remained suboptimal throughout the study period.

A cross-national comparison of 17 countries' insulin glargine drug labels.

PURPOSE: Type 2 diabetes mellitus has reached epidemic proportions worldwide. Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus will require insulin, and the evidence-based use of insulin is described in the prescription drug label. Product labels in different countries may provide inconsistent information. We evaluated the variability in drug label content for one brand of basal insulin across diverse settings. METHODS: We examined the drug label content pertinent to effective and safe use of insulin glargine across 17 countries: Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates), Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Turkey, UK, and the USA. We compared label characteristics in settings where drug labels were governed by a local regulatory authority versus countries where labels were administered by a regional body or adopted from another locale. RESULTS: All 17 labels cautioned that providers should consider age, illness, diet, and exercise when prescribing. Only two (12%) described care of the fasting patient. Caution was urged for patients with renal or hepatic impairment in 16 (94%) labels. Four (24%) did not describe responses to missed doses, and five (29%) failed to recommend patient counseling about the risk of hypoglycemia. Labels emerging from regional or adopted regulatory bodies reported fewer patients in efficacy studies than did labels from settings with their own drug regulatory agencies (365 ± 0 patients vs. 3560 ± 2938, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in the content of drug labels for glargine, which may lead to international inconsistency in quality of care for diabetic patients.

Patterns and trends in insulin intensification among patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review.

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) diagnoses are skyrocketing, making treatment of this disease an increasing focus of primary care visits. Guidelines recommend insulin intensification over time to achieve HbA1c targets. We conducted a systematic review regarding patterns and trends of insulin intensification and barriers to intensification. Providers across primary and specialty care settings often did not intensify insulin regimens despite patients' clinical status. Even among progressed patients, HbA1c values remained high. The paucity of available studies prevented a comprehensive understanding of patterns and trends in insulin intensification. Such information is needed to assess the quality of pharmacologic care for patients with T2DM.

Effect of smoking on comparative efficacy of antiplatelet agents: systematic review, meta-analysis, and indirect comparison.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether smoking status is associated with the efficacy of antiplatelet treatment in the prevention of cardiovascular events. DESIGN: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and indirect comparisons. DATA SOURCES: Medline (1966 to present) and Embase (1974 to present), with supplementary searches in databases of abstracts from major cardiology conferences, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) and the CAB Abstracts databases, and Google Scholar. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials of clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor that examined clinical outcomes among subgroups of smokers and nonsmokers. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently extracted all data, including information on the patient populations included in the trials, treatment types and doses, definitions of clinical outcomes and duration of follow-up, definitions of smoking subgroups and number of patients in each group, and effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals for each smoking status subgroup. RESULTS: Of nine eligible randomized trials, one investigated clopidogrel compared with aspirin, four investigated clopidogrel plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone, and one investigated double dose compared with standard dose clopidogrel; these trials include 74,489 patients, of whom 21,717 (29%) were smokers. Among smokers, patients randomized to clopidogrel experienced a 25% reduction in the primary composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke compared with patients in the control groups (relative risk 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.83). In nonsmokers, however, clopidogrel produced just an 8% reduction in the composite outcome (0.92, 0.87 to 0.98). Two studies investigated prasugrel plus aspirin compared with clopidogrel plus aspirin, and one study investigated ticagrelor plus aspirin compared with clopidogrel plus aspirin. In smokers, the relative risk was 0.71 (0.61 to 0.82) for prasugrel compared with clopidogrel and 0.83 (0.68 to 1.00) for ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel. Corresponding relative risks were 0.92 (0.83 to 1.01) and 0.89 (0.79 to 1.00) among nonsmokers. CONCLUSIONS: In randomized clinical trials of antiplatelet drugs, the reported clinical benefit of clopidogrel in reducing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke was seen primarily in smokers, with little benefit in nonsmokers.