Sengwee Toh1, Luis A García Rodríguez, Miguel A Hernán. 1. Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School/Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA. darrentoh@post.harvard.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: A semi-automated high-dimensional propensity score (hd-PS) algorithm has been proposed to adjust for confounding in claims databases. The feasibility of using this algorithm in other types of healthcare databases is unknown. METHODS: We estimated the comparative safety of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective COX-2 inhibitors regarding the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in The Health Improvement Network, an electronic medical record (EMR) database in the UK. We compared the adjusted effect estimates when the confounders were identified using expert knowledge or the semi-automated hd-PS algorithm. RESULTS: Compared with the 411,616 traditional NSAID initiators, the crude odds ratio (OR) of UGIB was 1.50 (95%CI: 0.98, 2.28) for the 43,569 selective COX-2 inhibitor initiators. The OR dropped to 0.81 (0.52, 1.27) upon adjustment for known risk factors for UGIB that are typically available in both claims and EMR databases. The OR remained similar when further adjusting for covariates--smoking, alcohol consumption, and body mass index-that are not typically recorded in claims databases (OR 0.81; 0.51, 1.26) or adding 500 empirically identified covariates using the hd-PS algorithm (OR 0.78; 0.49, 1.22). Adjusting for age and sex plus 500 empirically identified covariates produced an OR of 0.87 (0.56, 1.34). CONCLUSIONS: The hd-PS algorithm can be implemented in pharmacoepidemiologic studies that use primary care EMR databases such as The Health Improvement Network. For the NSAID-UGIB association for which major confounders are well known, further adjustment for covariates selected by the algorithm had little impact on the effect estimate.
PURPOSE: A semi-automated high-dimensional propensity score (hd-PS) algorithm has been proposed to adjust for confounding in claims databases. The feasibility of using this algorithm in other types of healthcare databases is unknown. METHODS: We estimated the comparative safety of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective COX-2 inhibitors regarding the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in The Health Improvement Network, an electronic medical record (EMR) database in the UK. We compared the adjusted effect estimates when the confounders were identified using expert knowledge or the semi-automated hd-PS algorithm. RESULTS: Compared with the 411,616 traditional NSAID initiators, the crude odds ratio (OR) of UGIB was 1.50 (95%CI: 0.98, 2.28) for the 43,569 selective COX-2 inhibitor initiators. The OR dropped to 0.81 (0.52, 1.27) upon adjustment for known risk factors for UGIB that are typically available in both claims and EMR databases. The OR remained similar when further adjusting for covariates--smoking, alcohol consumption, and body mass index-that are not typically recorded in claims databases (OR 0.81; 0.51, 1.26) or adding 500 empirically identified covariates using the hd-PS algorithm (OR 0.78; 0.49, 1.22). Adjusting for age and sex plus 500 empirically identified covariates produced an OR of 0.87 (0.56, 1.34). CONCLUSIONS: The hd-PS algorithm can be implemented in pharmacoepidemiologic studies that use primary care EMR databases such as The Health Improvement Network. For the NSAID-UGIB association for which major confounders are well known, further adjustment for covariates selected by the algorithm had little impact on the effect estimate.
Authors: Tobias Kurth; Alexander M Walker; Robert J Glynn; K Arnold Chan; J Michael Gaziano; Klaus Berger; James M Robins Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2005-12-21 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: M Alan Brookhart; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Kenneth J Rothman; Robert J Glynn; Jerry Avorn; Til Stürmer Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2006-04-19 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: A Lanas; L A García-Rodríguez; M T Arroyo; F Gomollón; F Feu; A González-Pérez; E Zapata; G Bástida; L Rodrigo; S Santolaria; M Güell; C M de Argila; E Quintero; F Borda; J M Piqué Journal: Gut Date: 2006-05-10 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Miguel A Hernán; Alvaro Alonso; Roger Logan; Francine Grodstein; Karin B Michels; Walter C Willett; Joann E Manson; James M Robins Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Y-F Chen; P Jobanputra; P Barton; S Bryan; A Fry-Smith; G Harris; R S Taylor Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Eric I Benchimol; Liam Smeeth; Astrid Guttmann; Katie Harron; David Moher; Irene Petersen; Henrik T Sørensen; Jean-Marie Januel; Erik von Elm; Sinéad M Langan Journal: CMAJ Date: 2019-02-25 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Jeff Y Yang; Michael Webster-Clark; Jennifer L Lund; Robert S Sandler; Evan S Dellon; Til Stürmer Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Lingling Li; William M Vollmer; Melissa G Butler; Pingsheng Wu; Elyse O Kharbanda; Ann Chen Wu Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2014-01-23 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Gabriela Vazquez-Benitez; Elyse O Kharbanda; Allison L Naleway; Heather Lipkind; Lakshmi Sukumaran; Natalie L McCarthy; Saad B Omer; Lei Qian; Stanley Xu; Michael L Jackson; Vinutha Vijayadev; Nicola P Klein; James D Nordin Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2016-07-22 Impact factor: 4.897