Presentations in this series 1.Introduction 2.Self-matching 3.Proxies 4.Intermediates 5.Instruments 6.Equipoise Avoiding Bias Due to Unmeasured Covariates.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
Advertisements

Comparator Selection in Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
1 Arlene Ash QMC - Third Tuesday September 21, 2010 (as amended, Sept 23) Analyzing Observational Data: Focus on Propensity Scores.
Statistical Analysis and Data Interpretation What is significant for the athlete, the statistician and team doctor? important Will Hopkins
NSAIDs and GI and Renal Complications Lessons from Tennessee Medicaid population studies (and selected others)
Observational Studies and RCT Libby Brewin. What are the 3 types of observational studies? Cross-sectional studies Case-control Cohort.
Case-Control Studies (Retrospective Studies). What is a cohort?
Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy Adverse Reactions to NSAIDs David Henry Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences The University.
1 Case-Control Study Design Two groups are selected, one of people with the disease (cases), and the other of people with the same general characteristics.
KINE 4565: The epidemiology of injury prevention Case control and case crossover studies.
Sensitivity Analysis for Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
Presentations in this series 1.Introduction 2.Self-matching 3.Proxies 4.Intermediates 5.Instruments 6.Equipoise Avoiding Bias Due to Unmeasured Covariates.
PREVALENCE AND PREDICTORS OF POTENTIALLY INAPPROPRIATE MEDICATION USE IN ELDERLY PATIENTS IN TWO INDIAN TEACHING HOSPITALS PARTHASARATHI G, HARUGERI A,
Journal Club Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Health: Current Evidence January–February 2009.
RACIAL DISPARITIES IN PRESCRIPTION DRUG UTILIZATION AN ANALYSIS OF BETA-BLOCKER AND STATIN USE FOLLOWING HOSPITALIZATION FOR ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION.
Cohort Studies Hanna E. Bloomfield, MD, MPH Professor of Medicine Associate Chief of Staff, Research Minneapolis VA Medical Center.
Non Steroidal Anti Inflammatory Drugs, Nonopioid Analgesics By S.Bohlooli, PhD.
NON-STEROIDAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS AND PANCREATIC CANCER RISK: A NESTED CASE-CONTROL STUDY Marie Bradley, Carmel Hughes, Marie Cantwell and Liam Murray.
THE PREVALENCE AND PREDICTORS OF LOW-COST GENERIC PROGRAM USE IN A NATIONALLY REPRESENTATIVE ADULT POPULATION: IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENTS, RESEARCH, AND.
Stratification and Adjustment
Comparing high-dimensional propensity score versus lasso variable selection for confounding adjustment in a novel simulation framework Jessica Franklin.
An Update on NSAID Labeling and Data Review DSaRM Advisory Committee February 10, 2006 Sharon Hertz, M.D. Deputy Director Division of Anesthesia, Analgesia,
Multiple Choice Questions for discussion
Case control study Moderator : Chetna Maliye Presenter Reshma Sougaijam.
Evidence-Based Medicine 4 More Knowledge and Skills for Critical Reading Karen E. Schetzina, MD, MPH.
Presentations in this series 1.Overview and Randomization 2.Self-matching 3.Proxies 4.Intermediates 5.Instruments 6.Equipoise Avoiding Bias Due to Unmeasured.
Epidemiology The Basics Only… Adapted with permission from a class presentation developed by Dr. Charles Lynch – University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Instrumental variables for comparative effectiveness research: a review of applications M. Alan Brookhart, Ph.D. Division of Pharmacoepidemiology, Brigham.
Evidence-Based Medicine 3 More Knowledge and Skills for Critical Reading Karen E. Schetzina, MD, MPH.
FRAMING RESEARCH QUESTIONS The PICO Strategy. PICO P: Population of interest I: Intervention C: Control O: Outcome.
Thomas S. Rector, PhD, Inder S. Anand, MD, David Nelson, PhD, Kristine Ensrud, MD and Ann Bangerter, MS CHF QUERI NETWORK November 8, 2007 VA Medical Center,
Postmarketing Safety Assessment of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw Pamidronate & Zoledronic Acid Division of Drug Risk Evaluation Office of Drug Safety FDA Carol.
An epidemiologic perspective on etoricoxib David J. Graham, MD, MPH Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology April 12, 2007.
Design and Analysis of Clinical Study 6. Case-control Study Dr. Tuan V. Nguyen Garvan Institute of Medical Research Sydney, Australia.
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF ARTICLE ON HARM. Among patients with acute rheumatic fever, will administration of non steroidal anti- inflammatory drugs have adverse.
Presentations in this series 1.Introduction 2.Self-matching 3.Proxies 4.Intermediates 5.Instruments 6.Equipoise Avoiding Bias Due to Unmeasured Covariates.
Design and Analysis of Clinical Study 2. Bias and Confounders Dr. Tuan V. Nguyen Garvan Institute of Medical Research Sydney, Australia.
Cardiovascular Risk and NSAIDs Arthritis Advisory Committee Meeting November 29, 2006 Sharon Hertz, M.D. Deputy Director Division of Analgesia, Anesthesia,
LEADING RESEARCH… MEASURES THAT COUNT Challenges of Studying Cardiovascular Outcomes in ADHD Elizabeth B. Andrews, MPH, PhD, VP, Pharmacoepidemiology and.
Understanding Medical Articles and Reports Linda Vincent, MPH UCSF Breast SPORE Advocate September 24,
Measuring associations between exposures and outcomes
1 Study Design Issues and Considerations in HUS Trials Yan Wang, Ph.D. Statistical Reviewer Division of Biometrics IV OB/OTS/CDER/FDA April 12, 2007.
Summary Pattern of Specific COX II Inhibitors Use Physician prescribed appropriate COX II use in high risk was 40.08% and inappropriate COX II use in low.
NSAIDs.
Self-Controlled Studies Case Crossover Case Series
Transparency in the Use of Propensity Score Methods
Small Bowel Toxicity of Nonselective NSAIDs Revealed by Capsule Endoscopy: Results From a Pivotal Clinical Trial Glenn M. Eisen, M.D., M.P.H. Associate.
Hot Topic Presentation Lars Halford, GP ST3 March 2010
East & South East England Specialist Pharmacy Services East of England, London, South Central & South East Coast NSAIDS – Efficacy and Safety Expert speaker.
Carina Signori, DO Journal Club August 2010 Macdonald, M. et al. Diabetes Care; Jun 2010; 33,
Peptic Ulcer Bleeding Risk. The Role of Helicobacter Pylori Infection in NSAID/Low-Dose Aspirin Users C. Sostres, MD, P. Carrera-Lasfuentes, PhD, R. Benito,
Case Control study. An investigation that compares a group of people with a disease to a group of people without the disease. Used to identify and assess.
Measures of disease frequency Simon Thornley. Measures of Effect and Disease Frequency Aims – To define and describe the uses of common epidemiological.
NHS Specialist Pharmacy Service NSAIDS – efficacy and safety Expert speaker Slide set Key content from the NPC NSAIDS QIPP slides is gratefully acknowledged.
Rory M Marks, John Z Ayanian, Brahmajee K Nallamothu
Association Between Serotonergic Antidepressant Use During Pregnancy and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children Hilary K. Brown, PhD; Joel G. Ray, MD, MSc,
Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors: Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Acetaminophen 1.
Cost effectiveness of COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs alone or in combination with a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis.
OHDSI Method Evaluation
Date:2017/10/03 Presenter: Wen-Ching Lan
Self-controlled Studies
Presenter: Wen-Ching Lan Date: 2018/08/01
NSAIDs: Risk of acute MI compared with remote use
Drug used within 3 months of index date Adjusted odds ratio* p
Presenter: Wen-Ching Lan Date: 2018/03/28
Volume 151, Issue 6, Pages e10 (December 2016)
Interpreting Basic Statistics
Volume 133, Issue 3, Pages (September 2007)
Interpreting Epidemiologic Results.
Presentation transcript:

Presentations in this series 1.Introduction 2.Self-matching 3.Proxies 4.Intermediates 5.Instruments 6.Equipoise Avoiding Bias Due to Unmeasured Covariates Alec Walker

TD U

TD U Randomization

TD U Self-matching

Celecoxib versus Naproxen versus No Treatment PUB Hospital Admission Celecoxib, Naproxen and GI Bleeding in the treatment of pain MD-perceived risk of peptic ulcer & bleeding (PUB) True risk of PUB

Confounding by Contraindication High risk for peptic ulcer and bleeding makes treatment with naproxen inadvisable. Celecoxib would be better. No treatment at all is safest. Celecoxib versus Naproxen versus No Treatment PUB Hospital Admission MD-perceived risk of peptic ulcer & bleeding (PUB) True risk of PUB

The physician’s belief, not the true risk, is what affects the choice of therapy. Celecoxib versus Naproxen versus No Treatment PUB Hospital Admission MD-perceived risk of peptic ulcer & bleeding (PUB) True risk of PUB

Celecoxib Ulcer PUB

Celecoxib Ulcer

Celecoxib Ulcer Confounded

Self-Matching Key Celecoxib Naproxen No Therapy Event X X X

Self-Matching Key Celecoxib Naproxen No Therapy Event X X X When there is no event, there is no within-person comparison to be made, if we’re looking at relative risk.

Celecoxib versus Naproxen versus No Treatment PUB Hospital Admission MD-perceived risk of peptic ulcer & bleeding (PUB) True risk of PUB

Matching on person means that all comparisons are within person and therefore at a common level of physician perception. Celecoxib versus Naproxen versus No Treatment PUB Hospital Admission MD-perceived risk of peptic ulcer & bleeding (PUB) True risk of PUB

Celecoxib versus Naproxen versus No Treatment PUB Hospital Admission MD-perceived risk of peptic ulcer & bleeding (PUB) True risk of PUB The time of observation needs to be sufficiently short that true risk and physician perception do not change.

Compare the Exposure at Case Occurrence to Sampled Exposure(s) in the Past

Non-Cases Drop Out of Consideration

Uninformative Time Drops Out as Well Case window Control window

Case and Control Windows  Case window: period preceding the event (GI bleeding) during which the exposure (celecoxib, naproxen, no treatment) may have altered the risk  Control window(s): periods of the same length as, and not overlapping with, the case window that furthermore provide an estimate of the null- hypothesis probability of exposure for each case.  The core study technique is to identify cases, then ascertain exposure status in the case window and at earlier points in time – the control windows.

Estimating the Relative Risk Case Window Control Window Exposed ExposedYesNo Yesf 10 Nof 01  Place each case in the above table, according to exposure in the case window and the control window  Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio for matched sets Reduces to ratio of counts in discordant exposure windows ( f 10 / f 01 ) when there is one control  Conditional logistic regression When there are concurrent time-varying confounders Accommodates many-to-one matching of control and case windows  Concordant case-control windows are uninformative

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2011; 20: 763–771 Risk of hospitalization for upper gastrointestinal adverse events associated with nonsteroidal anti ‐ inflammatory drugs: a nationwide case ‐ crossover study in Taiwan Chia ‐ Hsuin Chang1,2†, Hsi ‐ Chieh Chen1†, Jou ‐ Wei Lin3, Chuei ‐ Wen Kuo4, Wen ‐ Yi Shau5 and Mei ‐ Shu Lai1* 1Institute of Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan 2Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan 3Cardiovascular Center, National Taiwan University Hospital Yun ‐ Lin Branch, Dou ‐ Liou City, Yun ‐ Lin, Taiwan 4National Health Insurance Mediation Committee, Department of Health, Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan 5Division of Health Technology Assessment, Center for Drug Evaluation, Taipei, Taiwan ABSTRACT Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the risks of upper gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events across a variety of oral and parenteral coxibs and nonselective nonsteroidal anti ‐ inflammatory drugs (nsNSAIDs) in the general population of Taiwan. Methods In a case ‐ crossover study, all patients aged ≥20 years who were hospitalized for upper GI adverse events (peptic ulcer and bleeding; gastritis and duodenitis) in 2006 were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes from inpatient claims from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database. For each patient, the case period was defined as 1–30 days and the control period as 31–60 days before the date of hospitalization. Outpatient pharmacy prescription database was searched for individual NSAID use during the case and control periods. A conditional logistic regression model was applied, and adjusted self ‐ matched odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were reported. Results A total of patients hospitalized for upper GI adverse events were included. The adjusted OR was 1.52 (95%CI: 1.27–1.82) for celecoxib and 2.56 (95%CI: 2.44–2.69) for oral nsNSAIDs. The ORs were above 2 for oral piroxicam, diclofenac, ketorolac, ketoprofen, acemetacin, and naproxen and were around 1.5 for tiaprofenic acid, indomethacin, mefenamic acid, and ibuprofen. Higher risks were evident for parenteral NSAIDs, in particular ketorolac with an OR of 5.76 (95%CI: 5.14–6.44). Conclusion Use of celecoxib and all nsNSAIDs studied was associated with a greater risk of upper GI toxicity as compared with nonuse. Parenteral NSAIDs posed a higher risk, but celecoxib, ibuprofen, and mefenamic acid posed a lower risk than other NSAIDs. Purpose This study aimed to evaluate risks of upper gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events across a variety of oral and parenteral coxibs and nonselective nonsteroidal anti ‐ inflammatory drugs (nsNSAIDs) in the general population of Taiwan. Methods In a case ‐ crossover study, all patients aged ≥20 years who were hospitalized for upper GI adverse events (peptic ulcer and bleeding; gastritis and duodenitis) in 2006 were identified... For each patient, the case period was defined as 1–30 days and the control period as 31–60 days before the date of hospitalization. Outpatient pharmacy prescription database was searched for individual NSAID use during the case and control periods. A conditional logistic regression model was applied... Results A total of patients hospitalized for upper GI adverse events were included. The adjusted OR was 1.52 (95%CI: 1.27–1.82) for celecoxib and 2.56 (95%CI: 2.44–2.69) for oral nsNSAIDs… Conclusion Use of celecoxib and all nsNSAIDs studied was associated with a greater risk of upper GI toxicity as compared with nonuse…

Case Window Control Window Exposed ExposedYesNo Yesf 10 Nof 01 Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2011; 20: 763–771

Case Window Control Window Exposed ExposedYesNo Yes413 Nof 01 Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2011; 20: 763–771

Case Window Control Window Exposed ExposedYesNo Yes413 No232 Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2011; 20: 763–771

Case Window Control Window Exposed ExposedYesNo Yes413 No232 RR crude = 413/232 = 1.78 Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2011; 20: 763–771

*Conditional logistic regression adjusted for important potential time ‐ varying confounding variables including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, other antidepressants, calcium channel blockers, nitrates, systemic corticosteroids, low ‐ dose aspirin, proton pump inhibitors, histamine 2 receptor blockers, and sucralfate.

 Self-matched studies compare exposure at the time of an outcome event to the probability of exposure in the same person Calculated from the individuals own history Assuming the null hypothesis of no effect of exposure on the risk of outcome.  Unmeasured covariates that do not vary over time within person do not confound the estimate of relative risk.  Self-matched studies work well for intermittent exposures whose associated risks rise and fall quickly  Self-matched studies give mathematical meaning to the question you might well hear from your doctor: “Were you doing anything unusual just before you got sick?”

Presentations in this series 1.Overview and Randomization 2.Self-matching 3.Proxies 4.Intermediates 5.Instruments Avoiding Bias Due to Unmeasured Covariates Alec Walker