RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Current hemovigilance methods generally rely on survey data or administrative claims data utilizing billing and revenue codes, each of which has limitations. We used electronic health records (EHR) linked to blood bank data to comprehensively characterize red blood cell (RBC) utilization patterns and trends in three healthcare systems participating in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) initiative. METHODS: We used Information Standard for Blood and Transplant (ISBT) 128 codes linked to EHR from three healthcare systems data sources to identify and quantify RBC-transfused individuals, RBC transfusion episodes, transfused RBC units, and processing methods per year during 2012-2018. RESULTS: There were 577,822 RBC units transfused among 112,705 patients comprising 345,373 transfusion episodes between 2012 and 2018. Utilization in terms of RBC units and patients increased slightly in one and decreased slightly in the other two healthcare facilities. About 90% of RBC-transfused patients had 1 (~46%) or 2-5 (~42%)transfusion episodes in 2018. Among the small proportion of patients with ≥12 transfusion episodes per year, approximately 60% of episodes included only one RBC unit. All facilities used leukocyte-reduced RBCs during the study period whereas irradiated RBC utilization patterns differed across facilities. DISCUSSION: ISBT 128 codes and EHRs were used to observe patterns of RBC transfusion and modification methods at the unit level and patient level in three healthcare systems participating in the BEST initiative. This study shows that the ISBT 128 coding system in an EHR environment provides a feasible source for hemovigilance activities.
Assuntos
Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Transfusão de Eritrócitos , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto , Estados Unidos , Eritrócitos , Idoso , Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Bancos de Sangue/normas , Bancos de Sangue/estatística & dados numéricos , AdolescenteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are authorized for use in children in the United States; real-world assessment of vaccine effectiveness in children is needed. This study's objective was to estimate the effectiveness of receiving a complete primary series of monovalent BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine in US children. METHODS: This cohort study identified children aged 5-17 years vaccinated with BNT162b2 matched with unvaccinated children. Participants and BNT162b2 vaccinations were identified in Optum and CVS Health insurance administrative claims databases linked with Immunization Information System (IIS) COVID-19 vaccination records from 16 US jurisdictions between December 11, 2020, and May 31, 2022 (end date varied by database and IIS). Vaccinated children were followed from their first BNT162b2 dose and matched to unvaccinated children on calendar date, US county of residence, and demographic and clinical factors. Censoring occurred if vaccinated children failed to receive a timely dose 2 or if unvaccinated children received any dose. Two COVID-19 outcome definitions were evaluated: COVID-19 diagnosis in any medical setting and COVID-19 diagnosis in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus HR. VE was estimated overall, within age subgroups, and within variant-specific eras. Sensitivity, negative control, and quantitative bias analyses evaluated various potential biases. RESULTS: There were 453,655 eligible vaccinated children one-to-one matched to unvaccinated comparators (mean age 12 years; 50% female). COVID-19 hospitalizations/ED visits were rare in children, regardless of vaccination status (Optum, 41.2 per 10,000 person-years; CVS Health, 44.1 per 10,000 person-years). Overall, vaccination was associated with reduced incidence of any medically diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 38% [95% CI, 36-40%]) and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 61% [95% CI, 56-65%]). VE estimates were lowest among children 5-11 years and during the Omicron-variant era. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of a complete BNT162b2 vaccine primary series was associated with overall reduced medically diagnosed COVID-19 and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 in children; observed VE estimates differed by age group and variant era. REGISTRATION: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website ( https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf ).
Assuntos
Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19 , Eficácia de Vacinas , Humanos , Vacina BNT162/administração & dosagem , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Feminino , Masculino , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Eficácia de Vacinas/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos de Coortes , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Several passive surveillance systems reported increased risks of myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination, especially in young men. We used active surveillance from large health-care databases to quantify and enable the direct comparison of the risk of myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, after mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccinations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, examining the primary outcome of myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, identified using the International Classification of Diseases diagnosis codes, occurring 1-7 days post-vaccination, evaluated in COVID-19 mRNA vaccinees aged 18-64 years using health plan claims databases in the USA. Observed (O) incidence rates were compared with expected (E) incidence rates estimated from historical cohorts by each database. We used multivariate Poisson regression to estimate the adjusted incidence rates, specific to each brand of vaccine, and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2. We used meta-analyses to pool the adjusted incidence rates and IRRs across databases. FINDINGS: A total of 411 myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, events were observed among 15â148â369 people aged 18-64 years who received 16â912â716 doses of BNT162b2 and 10â631â554 doses of mRNA-1273. Among men aged 18-25 years, the pooled incidence rate was highest after the second dose, at 1·71 (95% CI 1·31 to 2·23) per 100â000 person-days for BNT162b2 and 2·17 (1·55 to 3·04) per 100â000 person-days for mRNA-1273. The pooled IRR in the head-to-head comparison of the two mRNA vaccines was 1·43 (95% CI 0·88 to 2·34), with an excess risk of 27·80 per million doses (-21·88 to 77·48) in mRNA-1273 recipients compared with BNT162b2. INTERPRETATION: An increased risk of myocarditis or pericarditis was observed after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and was highest in men aged 18-25 years after a second dose of the vaccine. However, the incidence was rare. These results do not indicate a statistically significant risk difference between mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2, but it should not be ruled out that a difference might exist. Our study results, along with the benefit-risk profile, continue to support vaccination using either of the two mRNA vaccines. FUNDING: US Food and Drug Administration.
Assuntos
Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19 , Miocardite , Pericardite , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV/efeitos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Vacina BNT162/efeitos adversos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Estudos de Coortes , Humanos , Masculino , Miocardite/diagnóstico , Miocardite/epidemiologia , Miocardite/etiologia , Pericardite/diagnóstico , Pericardite/epidemiologia , Pericardite/etiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal patterns of immune globulins (IG) use have not been described in large populations. Understanding IG usage is important given potential supply limitations impacting individuals for whom IG is the sole life-saving/health-preserving therapy. The study describes US IG utilization patterns from 2009 to 2019. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using IBM MarketScan commercial and Medicare claims data, we examined four metrics overall and by condition-specific categories during 2009-2019: (1) IG administrations per 100,000 person-years, (2) IG recipients per 100,000 enrollees, (3) average annual administrations per recipient, and (4) average annual dose per recipient. RESULTS: In the commercial and Medicare populations respectively: IG administrations per 100,000 person-years increased by 120% (213-470) and 144% (692-1693); IG recipients per 100,000 enrollees grew by 71% (24-42) and 102% (89-179); average annual administrations per recipient rose by 28% (8-10) and 19% (8-9); and average annual dose (grams) per recipient increased by 29% (384-497) and 34% (317-426). IG administrations associated with immunodeficiency (per 100,000 person-years) increased by 154% (from 127 to 321) and 176% (from 365 to 1007). Autoimmune and neurologic conditions were associated with higher annual average administrations and dose than other conditions. DISCUSSION: IG use increased, coinciding with a growth in the IG recipient population in the United States. Several conditions contributed to the trend, with the largest increase observed among immunodeficient individuals. Future investigations should assess changes in the demand for IVIG by disease state or indication and consider treatment effectiveness.
Assuntos
Imunoglobulina G , Medicare , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Monitoring COVID-19 testing volumes and test positivity is an integral part of the response to the pandemic. We described the characteristics of individuals who were tested and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the pre-vaccine phase of the pandemic in the United States (U.S.). METHODS: This descriptive study analyzed three U.S. electronic health record (EHR) databases (Explorys, Academic Health System, and OneFlorida) between February and November 2020, identifying patients who received an interpretable nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) result. Test-level data were used to characterize the settings in which tests were administered. Patient-level data were used to calculate test positivity rates and characterize the demographics, comorbidities, and hospitalization rates of COVID-19-positive patients. RESULTS: Over 40% of tests were conducted in outpatient care settings, with a median time between test order and result of 0-1 day for most settings. Patients tested were mostly female (55.6-57.7%), 18-44 years of age (33.9-41.2%), and Caucasian (44.0-66.7%). The overall test positivity rate was 13.0% in Explorys, 8.0% in Academic Health System, and 8.9% in OneFlorida. The proportion of patients hospitalized within 14 days of a positive COVID-19 NAAT result was 24.2-33.1% across databases, with patients over 75 years demonstrating the highest hospitalization rates (46.7-69.7% of positive tests). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of COVID-19 testing volume and positivity patterns across three large EHR databases provides insight into the characteristics of COVID-19-tested, COVID-19-test-positive, and hospitalized COVID-19-test-positive patients during the early phase of the pandemic in the U.S.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Teste para COVID-19 , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
PURPOSE: In this report, we use data from FDA's Sentinel System to focus on how augmenting a diagnosis-based chronic kidney disease cohort with patients identified through laboratory results impacts cohort characteristics and outcomes. METHODS: We used data from 2 Data Partners. Patients were eligible if they were health plan members on January 1, 2012. We classified chronic kidney disease patients into mutually exclusive categories according to the hierarchy of (1) ICD-9-CM diagnosis (DXGroup), or (2) two estimated glomerular filtration rates <60 mL/min/1.73m2 , separated by at least 90 days (2-LabGroup), or (3) a single estimated glomerular filtration rates <60 mL/min/1.73m2 (1-LabGroup). We compared the groups on demographic, clinical, and health care utilization characteristics using pairwise standardized differences. We used Cox regression to compare the groups on mortality, adjusting for baseline covariates. RESULTS: We identified 209 864 patients: 107 607 in DxGroup (51%) and 102 257 (49%) from laboratory data alone. For every characteristic, the DxGroup was the sickest, followed by the 2-LabGroup and then the 1-LabGroup. The DxGroup was more likely to die than 2-LabGroup (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47; 95% CI, 1.22-1.77) at Site 1; that effect was observed, but attenuated, at Site 2 (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.07-1.25). The DxGroup was more likely to die than the 1-LabGroup at Site 1 (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.20-1.55), but not at Site 2 (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that drug safety researchers consider whether the method of cohort identification contributes to generalizability of safety findings.
Assuntos
Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Serviços de Laboratório Clínico/estatística & dados numéricos , Farmacoepidemiologia/métodos , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/epidemiologia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Taxa de Filtração Glomerular , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/induzido quimicamente , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/diagnósticoRESUMO
PURPOSE: The US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel system developed tools for sequential surveillance. METHODS: In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, we sequentially compared outcomes for new users of rivaroxaban versus warfarin, employing propensity score matching and Cox regression. A total of 36 173 rivaroxaban and 79 520 warfarin initiators were variable-ratio matched within 2 monitoring periods. RESULTS: Statistically significant signals were observed for ischemic stroke (IS) (first period) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (second period) favoring rivaroxaban, and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) (second period) favoring warfarin. In follow-up analyses using primary position diagnoses from inpatient encounters for increased definition specificity, the hazard ratios (HR) for rivaroxaban vs warfarin new users were 0.61 (0.47, 0.79) for IS, 1.47 (1.29, 1.67) for GIB, and 0.71 (0.50, 1.01) for ICH. For GIB, the HR varied by age: <66 HR = 0.88 (0.60, 1.30) and 66+ HR = 1.49 (1.30, 1.71). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the capability of Sentinel to conduct prospective safety monitoring and raises no new concerns about rivaroxaban safety.
Assuntos
Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Inibidores do Fator Xa/efeitos adversos , Rivaroxabana/efeitos adversos , United States Food and Drug Administration/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Fibrilação Atrial/complicações , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Infarto Encefálico/epidemiologia , Infarto Encefálico/etiologia , Infarto Encefálico/prevenção & controle , Inibidores do Fator Xa/administração & dosagem , Feminino , Seguimentos , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/epidemiologia , Humanos , Hemorragias Intracranianas/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragias Intracranianas/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Projetos Piloto , Estudos Prospectivos , Rivaroxabana/administração & dosagem , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Varfarina/administração & dosagem , Varfarina/efeitos adversosRESUMO
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate regression, matching, and stratification on propensity score (PS) or disease risk score (DRS) in a setting of sequential analyses where statistical hypotheses are tested multiple times. METHODS: In a setting of sequential analyses, we simulated incident users and binary outcomes with different confounding strength, outcome incidence, and the adoption rate of treatment. We compared Type I error rate, empirical power, and time to signal using the following confounder adjustments: (i) regression; (ii) treatment matching (1:1 or 1:4) on PS or DRS; and (iii) stratification on PS or DRS. We estimated PS and DRS using lookwise and cumulative methods (all data up to the current look). We applied these confounder adjustments in examining the association between non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and bleeding. RESULTS: Propensity score and DRS methods had similar empirical power and time to signal. However, DRS methods yielded Type I error rates up to 17% for 1:4 matching and 15.3% for stratification methods when treatment and outcome were common and confounding strength with treatment was stronger. When treatment and outcome were not common, stratification on PS and DRS and regression yielded 8-10% Type I error rates and inflated empirical power. However, when outcome and treatment were common, both regression and stratification on PS outperformed other matching methods with Type I error rates close to 5%. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest regression and stratification on PS when the outcomes and/or treatment is common and use of matching on PS with higher ratios when outcome or treatment is rare or moderately rare.
Assuntos
Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Simulação por Computador , Fatores de Confusão Epidemiológicos , Hemorragia/etiologia , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/uso terapêutico , Difusão de Inovações , Feminino , Hemorragia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pontuação de Propensão , Análise de RegressãoRESUMO
PURPOSE: Our purpose was to quantify missing baseline laboratory results, assess predictors of missingness, and examine performance of missing data methods. METHODS: Using the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database from three sites, we selected three exposure-outcome scenarios with laboratory results as baseline confounders. We compared hazard ratios (HRs) or risk differences (RDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from models that omitted laboratory results, included only available results (complete cases), and included results after applying missing data methods (multiple imputation [MI] regression, MI predictive mean matching [PMM] indicator). RESULTS: Scenario 1 considered glucose among second-generation antipsychotic users and diabetes. Across sites, glucose was available for 27.7-58.9%. Results differed between complete case and missing data models (e.g., olanzapine: HR 0.92 [CI 0.73, 1.12] vs 1.02 [0.90, 1.16]). Across-site models employing different MI approaches provided similar HR and CI; site-specific models provided differing estimates. Scenario 2 evaluated creatinine among individuals starting high versus low dose lisinopril and hyperkalemia. Creatinine availability: 44.5-79.0%. Results differed between complete case and missing data models (e.g., HR 0.84 [CI 0.77, 0.92] vs. 0.88 [0.83, 0.94]). HR and CI were identical across MI methods. Scenario 3 examined international normalized ratio (INR) among warfarin users starting interacting versus noninteracting antimicrobials and bleeding. INR availability: 20.0-92.9%. Results differed between ignoring INR versus including INR using missing data methods (e.g., RD 0.05 [CI -0.03, 0.13] vs 0.09 [0.00, 0.18]). Indicator and PMM methods gave similar estimates. CONCLUSION: Multi-site studies must consider site variability in missing data. Different missing data methods performed similarly. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Assuntos
Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Bases de Dados Factuais/estatística & dados numéricos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Antipsicóticos/administração & dosagem , Antipsicóticos/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Confusão Epidemiológicos , Creatinina/análise , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Feminino , Glucose/análise , Humanos , Coeficiente Internacional Normatizado/métodos , Lisinopril/administração & dosagem , Lisinopril/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Análise de Regressão , Varfarina/administração & dosagem , Varfarina/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: While safety of influenza vaccines is well-established, some studies have suggested potential associations between influenza vaccines and certain adverse events (AEs). This study examined the safety of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccines among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. METHODS: A self-controlled case series compared incidence rates of anaphylaxis, encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), and transverse myelitis following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations (i.e., any, high-dose or adjuvanted) in risk and control intervals among Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for event-dependent observation time and seasonality. Analyses also accounted for uncertainty from outcome misclassification where feasible. For AEs with any statistically significant associations, we stratified results by concomitant vaccination status. RESULTS: Among 12.7 million vaccine recipients, we observed 76 anaphylaxis, 276 encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, 134 GBS and 75 transverse myelitis cases. Only rates of anaphylaxis were elevated in risk compared to control intervals. With all adjustments, an elevated, but non-statistically significant, anaphylaxis rate was observed following any (IRR: 2.40, 95% CI: 0.96-6.03), high-dose (IRR: 2.31, 95% CI: 0.67-7.91), and adjuvanted (IRR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.71-15.08) influenza vaccination; anaphylaxis IRRs were 2.54 (95% CI: 0.49-13.05) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.38-7.05) for persons with and without concomitant vaccination, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, GBS, or transverse myelitis were not elevated following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. There was an increased rate of anaphylaxis following influenza vaccination that may have been influenced by concomitant vaccination.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Vacinação , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Anafilaxia/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/epidemiologia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/etiologia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/induzido quimicamente , Incidência , Vacinas contra Influenza/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Medicare/estatística & dados numéricos , Mielite Transversa/epidemiologia , Mielite Transversa/etiologia , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Importance: Active monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination provides early detection of rare outcomes that may not be identified in prelicensure trials. Objective: To conduct near-real-time monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination in the US pediatric population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated 21 prespecified health outcomes after exposure before early 2023 to BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or NVX-CoV2373 ancestral monovalent COVID-19 vaccines in children aged 6 months to 17 years by applying a near-real-time monitoring framework using health care data from 3 commercial claims databases in the US (Optum [through April 2023], Carelon Research [through March 2023], and CVS Health [through February 2023]). Increased rates of each outcome after vaccination were compared with annual historical rates from January 1 to December 31, 2019, and January 1 to December 31, 2020, as well as between April 1 and December 31, 2020. Exposure: Receipt of an ancestral monovalent BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 vaccine dose identified through administrative claims data linked with Immunization Information Systems data. Main Outcomes and Measures: Twenty-one prespecified health outcomes, of which 15 underwent sequential testing and 6 were only monitored descriptively due to lack of historical rates. Results: Among 4â¯102â¯016 vaccinated enrollees aged 6 months to 17 years, 2â¯058â¯142 (50.2%) were male and 3â¯901â¯370 (95.1%) lived in an urban area. Thirteen of 15 sequentially tested outcomes did not meet the threshold for a statistical signal. Statistical signals were detected for myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 vaccination in children aged 12 to 17 years and seizure after vaccination with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 in children aged 2 to 4 or 5 years. However, in post hoc sensitivity analyses, a statistical signal for seizure was observed only after mRNA-1273 when 2019 background rates were selected; no statistical signal was observed when 2022 rates were selected. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of pediatric enrollees across 3 commercial health insurance databases, statistical signals detected for myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 (ages 12-17 years) were consistent with previous reports, and seizures after BNT162b2 (ages 2-4 years) and mRNA-1273 vaccinations (ages 2-5 years) should be further investigated in a robust epidemiologic study with confounding adjustment. The US Food and Drug Administration concludes that the known and potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks of COVID-19 infection.
Assuntos
Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Vacina BNT162 , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Criança , Adolescente , Masculino , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Lactente , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Estudos de Coortes , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations has been identified in passive surveillance systems. TTS incidence rates (IRs) in the United States (U.S.) are needed to contextualize reports following COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We estimated annual and monthly IRs of overall TTS, common site TTS, and unusual site TTS for adults aged 18-64 years in Carelon Research and MarketScan commercial claims (2017-Oct 2020), CVS Health and Optum commercial claims (2019-Oct 2020), and adults aged ≥ 65 years using CMS Medicare claims (2019-Oct 2020); IRs were stratified by age, sex, and race/ethnicity (CMS Medicare). RESULTS: Across data sources, annual IRs for overall TTS were similar between Jan-Dec 2019 and Jan-Oct 2020. Rates were higher in Medicare (IRs: 370.72 and 365.63 per 100,000 person-years for 2019 and 2020, respectively) than commercial data sources (MarketScan IRs: 24.21 and 24.06 per 100,000 person-years; Optum IRs: 32.60 and 31.29 per 100,000 person-years; Carelon Research IRs: 24.46 and 26.16 per 100,000 person-years; CVS Health IRs: 30.31 and 30.25 per 100,000 person-years). Across years and databases, common site TTS IRs increased with age and were higher among males. Among adults aged ≥ 65 years, the common site TTS IR was highest among non-Hispanic black adults. Annual unusual site TTS IRs ranged between 2.02 and 3.04 (commercial) and 12.49 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Dec 2019; IRs ranged between 1.53 and 2.67 (commercial) and 11.57 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Oct 2020. Unusual site TTS IRs were higher in males and increased with age in commercial data sources; among adults aged ≥ 65 years, IRs decreased with age and were highest among non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska native adults. CONCLUSION: TTS IRs were generally similar across years, higher for males, and increased with age. These rates may contribute to surveillance of post-vaccination TTS.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Trombocitopenia , Trombose , Adulto , Masculino , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Medicare , Incidência , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Trombocitopenia/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Background: Monovalent booster/additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines were first authorized in August 2021 in the United States. We evaluated the real-world effectiveness of receipt of a monovalent booster/additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared with receiving a primary vaccine series without a booster/additional dose. Methods: Cohorts of individuals receiving a COVID-19 booster/additional dose after receipt of a complete primary vaccine series were identified in 2 administrative insurance claims databases (Optum, CVS Health) supplemented with state immunization information system data between August 2021 and March 2022. Individuals with a complete primary series but without a booster/additional dose were one-to-one matched to boosted individuals on calendar date, geography, and clinical factors. COVID-19 diagnoses were identified in any medical setting, or specifically in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models; vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus the HR by vaccine brand overall and within subgroups of variant-specific eras, immunocompromised status, and homologous/heterologous booster status. Results: Across both data sources, we identified 752,165 matched pairs for BNT162b2, 410,501 for mRNA-1273, and 11,398 for JNJ-7836735. For any medically diagnosed COVID-19, meta-analyzed VE estimates for BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and JNJ-7836735, respectively, were: BNT162b2, 54% (95% CI, 53%-56%); mRNA-1273, 58% (95% CI, 56%-59%); JNJ-7836735, 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%). For hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19, VE estimates ranged from 70% to 76%. VE was generally lower during the Omicron era than the Delta era and for immunocompromised individuals. There was little difference observed by homologous or heterologous booster status. Conclusion: The original, monovalent booster/additional doses were reasonably effective in real-world use among the populations for which they were indicated during the study period. Additional studies may be informative in the future as new variants emerge and new vaccines become available.Registration: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website (https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf).
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: During the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, the UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency received case reports suggesting a potentiation of warfarin anticoagulation by the antiviral drug oseltamivir. We evaluated this putative interaction using Medicare data. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of bleeding following addition of oseltamivir or comparator drugs among Medicare beneficiaries taking warfarin. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort evaluation using Medicare nationwide data. Cohort members were Medicare Parts A, B, and D beneficiaries from June 30, 2006 to October 31, 2010 receiving warfarin for at least 1 month prior to a concomitant drug of interest (oseltamivir, ampicillin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors). Bleeding within 14 days of new prescriptions for oseltamivir or comparators was identified using inpatient or emergency department ICD-9 (International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision) discharge diagnosis codes for gastrointestinal hemorrhage, epistaxis, hematuria, and intracranial bleeding. Patients with bleeding within 30 days preceding the prescription concomitant to warfarin were excluded. RESULTS: With concomitant ACE inhibitors as reference, adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for any bleeding events within 14 days were 1.47 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-1.88), 1.24 (95% CI = 0.97-1.57), and 2.74 (95% CI = 2.53-3.03), for warfarin plus ampicillin, oseltamivir, and TMP-SMX, respectively. In a sensitivity analysis, adjusted ORs over a 7-day period were 1.89 (95% CI = 1.29-2.59), 1.47 (95% CI = 1.06-2.02), and 3.07 (95% CI = 2.76-3.49) for warfarin plus ampicillin, oseltamivir, and TMP-SMX, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Bleeding with oseltamivir plus warfarin was not significantly increased over a 14-day observation period; a sensitivity analysis showed a statistically significant increase over a 7-day period; in contrast, the data consistently showed the known tendency of TMP-SMX to potentiate the effects of warfarin. The results should be interpreted with the limitations of this approach in mind, including the inability to control for unmeasured confounders.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Antivirais/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Influenza Humana/tratamento farmacológico , Oseltamivir/efeitos adversos , Varfarina/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Antivirais/administração & dosagem , Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Coortes , Interações Medicamentosas , Feminino , Hemorragia/diagnóstico , Hemorragia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Influenza Humana/sangue , Influenza Humana/complicações , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Classificação Internacional de Doenças , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Medicare , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Oseltamivir/administração & dosagem , Oseltamivir/uso terapêutico , Pandemias , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos , Varfarina/administração & dosagem , Varfarina/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
PURPOSE: To conduct a synthesis of the literature on methods to evaluate the impacts of FDA regulatory actions and identify best practices for future evaluations. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE for manuscripts published between January 1948 and August 2011 that included terms related to FDA, regulatory actions, and empirical evaluation; the review additionally included FDA-identified literature. We used a modified Delphi method to identify preferred methodologies. We included studies with explicit methods to address threats to validity and identified designs and analytic methods with strong internal validity that have been applied to other policy evaluations. RESULTS: We included 18 studies out of 243 abstracts and papers screened. Overall, analytic rigor in prior evaluations of FDA regulatory actions varied considerably; less than a quarter of studies (22%) included control groups. Only 56% assessed changes in the use of substitute products/services, and 11% examined patient health outcomes. Among studies meeting minimal criteria of rigor, 50% found no impact or weak/modest impacts of FDA actions and 33% detected unintended consequences. Among those studies finding significant intended effects of FDA actions, all cited the importance of intensive communication efforts. There are preferred methods with strong internal validity that have yet to be applied to evaluations of FDA regulatory actions. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous evaluations of the impact of FDA regulatory actions have been limited and infrequent. Several methods with strong internal validity are available to improve trustworthiness of future evaluations of FDA policies.
Assuntos
Qualidade de Produtos para o Consumidor/legislação & jurisprudência , Aprovação de Drogas/legislação & jurisprudência , Rotulagem de Medicamentos/legislação & jurisprudência , Determinação de Ponto Final/métodos , Regulamentação Governamental , Projetos de Pesquisa , Determinação de Ponto Final/estatística & dados numéricos , Projetos de Pesquisa/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMO
PURPOSE: It is increasingly necessary to analyze data from multiple sources when conducting public health safety surveillance or comparative effectiveness research. However, security, privacy, proprietary, and legal concerns often reduce data holders' willingness to share highly granular information. We describe and compare two approaches that do not require sharing of patient-level information to adjust for confounding in multi-site studies. METHODS: We estimated the risks of angioedema associated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and aliskiren in comparison with beta-blockers within Mini-Sentinel, which has created a distributed data system of 18 health plans. To obtain the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), we performed (i) a propensity score-stratified case-centered logistic regression analysis, a method identical to a stratified Cox regression analysis but needing only aggregated risk set data, and (ii) an inverse variance-weighted meta-analysis, which requires only the site-specific HR and variance. We also performed simulations to further compare the two methods. RESULTS: Compared with beta-blockers, the adjusted HR was 3.04 (95% CI: 2.81, 3.27) for ACEIs, 1.16 (1.00, 1.34) for ARBs, and 2.85 (1.34, 6.04) for aliskiren in the case-centered analysis. The corresponding HRs were 2.98 (2.76, 3.21), 1.15 (1.00, 1.33), and 2.86 (1.35, 6.04) in the meta-analysis. Simulations suggested that the two methods may produce different results under certain analytic scenarios. CONCLUSION: The case-centered analysis and the meta-analysis produced similar results without the need to share patient-level data across sites in our empirical study, but may provide different results in other study settings.
Assuntos
Angioedema/induzido quimicamente , Pesquisa Comparativa da Efetividade/métodos , Farmacoepidemiologia/métodos , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/efeitos adversos , Amidas/efeitos adversos , Angioedema/epidemiologia , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina/efeitos adversos , Simulação por Computador , Fatores de Confusão Epidemiológicos , Bases de Dados Factuais , Fumaratos/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Análise Multivariada , Pontuação de PropensãoRESUMO
PURPOSE: We aim to develop and validate the positive predictive value (PPV) of an algorithm to identify anaphylaxis using health plan administrative and claims data. Previously published PPVs for anaphylaxis using International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes range from 52% to 57%. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using administrative and claims data from eight health plans. Using diagnosis and procedure codes, we developed an algorithm to identify potential cases of anaphylaxis from the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database between January 2009 and December 2010. A random sample of medical charts (n = 150) was identified for chart abstraction. Two physician adjudicators reviewed each potential case. Using physician adjudicator judgments on whether the case met diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis, we calculated a PPV for the algorithm. RESULTS: Of the 122 patients for whom complete charts were received, 77 were judged by physician adjudicators to have anaphylaxis. The PPV for the algorithm was 63.1% (95%CI: 53.9-71.7%), using the clinical criteria by Sampson as the gold standard. The PPV was highest for inpatient encounters with ICD-9-CM codes of 995.0 or 999.4. By combining only the top performing ICD-9-CM codes, we identified an algorithm with a PPV of 75.0%, but only 66% of cases of anaphylaxis were identified using this modified algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The PPV for the ICD-9-CM-based algorithm for anaphylaxis was slightly higher than PPV estimates reported in prior studies, but remained low. We were able to identify an algorithm that optimized the PPV but demonstrated lower sensitivity for anaphylactic events.
Assuntos
Algoritmos , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Bases de Dados Factuais/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Anafilaxia/epidemiologia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Classificação Internacional de Doenças , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration , Adulto JovemRESUMO
PURPOSE: The validity of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes to identify diagnoses of severe acute liver injury (SALI) is not well known. We examined the positive predictive values (PPVs) of hospital ICD-9-CM diagnoses in identifying SALI among health plan members in the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database (MSDD) for patients without liver/biliary disease and for those with chronic liver disease (CLD). METHODS: We selected random samples of members (149 without liver/biliary disease; 75 with CLD) with a principal hospital diagnosis suggestive of SALI (ICD-9-CM 570, 572.2, 572.4, 572.8, 573.3, 573.8, or V42.7) in the MSDD (2009-2010). Medical records were reviewed by hepatologists to confirm SALI events. PPVs of codes and code combinations for confirmed SALI were determined by CLD status. RESULTS: Among 105 members with available records and no liver/biliary disease, SALI was confirmed in 26 (PPV, 24.7%; 95%CI, 16.9-34.1%). Combined hospital diagnoses of acute hepatic necrosis (570) and liver disease sequelae (572.8) had high PPV (100%; 95%CI, 59.0-100%) and identified 7/26 (26.9%) events. Among 46 CLD members with available records, SALI was confirmed in 19 (PPV, 41.3%; 95%CI, 27.0-56.8%). Acute hepatic necrosis (570) or hepatorenal syndrome (572.4) plus any other SALI code had a PPV of 83.3% (95%CI, 51.6-97.9%) and identified 10/19 (52.6%) events. CONCLUSIONS: Most individual hospital ICD-9-CM diagnoses had low PPV for confirmed SALI events. Select code combinations had high PPV but did not capture all events.
Assuntos
Doença Hepática Induzida por Substâncias e Drogas/epidemiologia , Codificação Clínica , Classificação Internacional de Doenças , Hepatopatias/epidemiologia , Doença Aguda , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Doença Hepática Induzida por Substâncias e Drogas/diagnóstico , Doença Hepática Induzida por Substâncias e Drogas/fisiopatologia , Doença Crônica , Estudos Transversais , Bases de Dados Factuais/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Hepatopatias/diagnóstico , Hepatopatias/fisiopatologia , Masculino , Prontuários Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Farmacoepidemiologia , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Vigilância de Produtos Comercializados , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMO
COVID-19 infections have contributed to substantial increases in hospitalizations. This study describes demographics, baseline clinical characteristics and treatments, and clinical outcomes among U.S. patients admitted to hospitals with COVID-19 during the prevaccine phase of the pandemic. A total of 20,446 hospitalized patients with a positive COVID-19 nucleic acid amplification test were identified from three large electronic health record databases during 5 February-30 November 2020 (Academic Health System: n = 4504; Explorys; n = 7492; OneFlorida: n = 8450). Over 90% of patients were ≥30 years of age, with an even distribution between sexes. At least one comorbidity was recorded in 84.6-96.1% of patients; cardiovascular and respiratory conditions (28.8-50.3%) and diabetes (25.6-44.4%) were most common. Anticoagulants were the most frequently reported medications on or up to 28 days after admission (44.5-81.7%). Remdesivir was administered to 14.1-24.6% of patients and increased over time. Patients exhibited higher COVID-19 severity 14 days following admission than the 14 days prior to and on admission. The length of in-patient hospital stay ranged from a median of 4 to 6 days, and over 85% of patients were discharged alive. These results promote understanding of the clinical characteristics and hospital-resource utilization associated with hospitalized COVID-19 over time.
RESUMO
Introduction: Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) has been reported following receipt of adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccines. However, no validation studies evaluating the accuracy of International Classification of Diseases-10-Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM)-based algorithm for unusual site TTS are available in the published literature. Methods: The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of clinical coding to 1) leverage literature review and clinical input to develop an ICD-10-CM-based algorithm to identify unusual site TTS as a composite outcome and 2) validate the algorithm against the Brighton Collaboration's interim case definition using laboratory, pathology, and imaging reports in an academic health network electronic health record (EHR) within the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative. Validation of up to 50 cases per thrombosis site was conducted, with positive predictive values (PPV) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) calculated using pathology or imaging results as the gold standard. Results: The algorithm identified 278 unusual site TTS cases, of which 117 (42.1%) were selected for validation. In both the algorithm-identified and validation cohorts, over 60% of patients were 56 years or older. The positive predictive value (PPV) for unusual site TTS was 76.1% (95% CI 67.2-83.2%) and at least 80% for all but one individual thrombosis diagnosis code. PPV for thrombocytopenia was 98.3% (95% CI 92.1-99.5%). Discussion: This study represents the first report of a validated ICD-10-CM-based algorithm for unusual site TTS. A validation effort found that the algorithm performed at an intermediate-to-high PPV, suggesting that the algorithm can be used in observational studies including active surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines and other medical products.