Literature DB >> 15805989

Bias in observational study of the effectiveness of nasal corticosteroids in asthma.

Samy Suissa1, Pierre Ernst.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A recent observational study suggests that intranasal corticosteroids used to treat allergic rhinitis are effective at preventing asthma outcomes, such as emergency visits. The approach to data analysis may have led to biased results because of misclassification of immortal time.
OBJECTIVE: To illustrate the bias in the cohort approach and to present the proper time-dependent analysis by replicating the recent study using data from another source.
METHODS: From an existing cohort of 30,569 patients with asthma age 5 to 44 years and identified from the Saskatchewan Health databases (1975-1997), we formed the cohort of all subjects who were in the source population between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1991. Subjects were followed to the first asthma hospitalization. All prescriptions dispensed during follow-up were identified. We replicated the time-fixed approach to data analysis used in the recent study and compared it with time-dependent approaches.
RESULTS: The cohort included 20,173 subjects, of whom 1849 were hospitalized for asthma between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1991. The time-fixed approach misclassified more than 5000 person-years of follow-up, corresponding to 44% of the exposed person-time. As a result, the rate ratio of asthma hospitalization after any use of nasal corticosteroids (NCSs) was 0.57 by the biased time-fixed approach compared with 1.13 by the proper time-dependent approach. The time-fixed approach produced a paradoxical protective effect of NCS with 1 or less canisters dispensed per year (odds ratio, 0.47), which was further exaggerated when the cohort was extended to 5 years (odds ratio, 0.33). Adjusted time-dependent analyses found no protective effect, even when NCSs were dispensed regularly (rate ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.54-2.21).
CONCLUSION: The time-fixed approach to the analysis of the effectiveness of NCSs on asthma outcomes leads, by its inherent misclassification of immortal time, to a considerable exaggeration of the protective effect of these medications in preventing severe asthma exacerbations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15805989     DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.12.1118

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol        ISSN: 0091-6749            Impact factor:   10.793


  9 in total

1.  Negative controls: a tool for detecting confounding and bias in observational studies.

Authors:  Marc Lipsitch; Eric Tchetgen Tchetgen; Ted Cohen
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 4.822

2.  International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis.

Authors:  Sarah K Wise; Sandra Y Lin; Elina Toskala; Richard R Orlandi; Cezmi A Akdis; Jeremiah A Alt; Antoine Azar; Fuad M Baroody; Claus Bachert; G Walter Canonica; Thomas Chacko; Cemal Cingi; Giorgio Ciprandi; Jacquelynne Corey; Linda S Cox; Peter Socrates Creticos; Adnan Custovic; Cecelia Damask; Adam DeConde; John M DelGaudio; Charles S Ebert; Jean Anderson Eloy; Carrie E Flanagan; Wytske J Fokkens; Christine Franzese; Jan Gosepath; Ashleigh Halderman; Robert G Hamilton; Hans Jürgen Hoffman; Jens M Hohlfeld; Steven M Houser; Peter H Hwang; Cristoforo Incorvaia; Deborah Jarvis; Ayesha N Khalid; Maritta Kilpeläinen; Todd T Kingdom; Helene Krouse; Desiree Larenas-Linnemann; Adrienne M Laury; Stella E Lee; Joshua M Levy; Amber U Luong; Bradley F Marple; Edward D McCoul; K Christopher McMains; Erik Melén; James W Mims; Gianna Moscato; Joaquim Mullol; Harold S Nelson; Monica Patadia; Ruby Pawankar; Oliver Pfaar; Michael P Platt; William Reisacher; Carmen Rondón; Luke Rudmik; Matthew Ryan; Joaquin Sastre; Rodney J Schlosser; Russell A Settipane; Hemant P Sharma; Aziz Sheikh; Timothy L Smith; Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn; Jody R Tversky; Maria C Veling; De Yun Wang; Marit Westman; Magnus Wickman; Mark Zacharek
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.858

3.  Randomized Trials Built on Sand: Examples from COPD, Hormone Therapy, and Cancer.

Authors:  Samy Suissa
Journal:  Rambam Maimonides Med J       Date:  2012-07-31

Review 4.  Allergic rhinitis: evidence for impact on asthma.

Authors:  Mike Thomas
Journal:  BMC Pulm Med       Date:  2006-11-30       Impact factor: 3.317

5.  Statistical methods for elimination of guarantee-time bias in cohort studies: a simulation study.

Authors:  In Sung Cho; Ye Rin Chae; Ji Hyeon Kim; Hae Rin Yoo; Suk Yong Jang; Gyu Ri Kim; Chung Mo Nam
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  Does influenza vaccination status change physician ordering patterns for respiratory viral panels? Inspection for selection bias.

Authors:  G K Balasubramani; Sean Saul; Mary Patricia Nowalk; Donald B Middleton; Jill M Ferdinands; Richard K Zimmerman
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 7.  Metformin and the risk of cancer: time-related biases in observational studies.

Authors:  Samy Suissa; Laurent Azoulay
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 19.112

8.  The knowledge, attitudes and practices of parents of children with asthma in 29 cities of China: a multi-center study.

Authors:  Jing Zhao; Kunling Shen; Li Xiang; Guoqing Zhang; Meng Xie; Juan Bai; Qiyi Chen
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 2.125

9.  Allergic rhinitis: the "Ghost Diagnosis" in patients with asthma.

Authors:  Maureen Egan; Supinda Bunyavanich
Journal:  Asthma Res Pract       Date:  2015-09-07
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.