Literature DB >> 22763756

High-dimensional versus conventional propensity scores in a comparative effectiveness study of coxibs and reduced upper gastrointestinal complications.

E Garbe1, S Kloss, M Suling, I Pigeot, S Schneeweiss.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: High-dimensional propensity score (hd-PS) adjustment has been proposed as a tool to improve control for confounding in pharmacoepidemiological studies using longitudinal claims databases. We investigated whether hd-PS matching improved confounding by indication in a study of Cox-2 inhibitors (coxibs) and traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs) and their association with the risk of upper gastrointestinal complications (UGIC).
METHODS: In a cohort study of new users of coxibs and tNSAIDs we compared the effectiveness of these drugs to reduce UGIC using hd-PS matching and conventional propensity score (PS) matching in the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database.
RESULTS: The unadjusted rate ratio (RR) of UGIC for coxib users versus tNSAID users was 1.21 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.91-1.61]. The conventional PS matched cohort based on 79 investigator-identified covariates resulted in a RR of 0.84 (0.56-1.26). The use of the hd-PS algorithm based on 900 empirical covariates further decreased the RR to 0.62 (0.43-0.91).
CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of hd-PS matching versus conventional PS matching resulted in improved point estimates for studying an intended treatment effect of coxibs versus tNSAIDs when benchmarked against results from randomized controlled trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22763756     DOI: 10.1007/s00228-012-1334-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  31 in total

Review 1.  Primer: administrative health databases in observational studies of drug effects--advantages and disadvantages.

Authors:  Samy Suissa; Edeltraut Garbe
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol       Date:  2007-12

2.  Exhaustion, automation, theory, and confounding.

Authors:  Marshall M Joffe
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 4.822

3.  Simultaneously assessing intended and unintended treatment effects of multiple treatment options: a pragmatic "matrix design".

Authors:  Jeremy A Rassen; Daniel H Solomon; Robert J Glynn; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2011-05-30       Impact factor: 2.890

4.  Positive predictive value of ICD-9 codes in the identification of cases of complicated peptic ulcer disease in the Saskatchewan hospital automated database.

Authors:  D S Raiford; S Pérez Gutthann; L A García Rodríguez
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.822

5.  A basic study design for expedited safety signal evaluation based on electronic healthcare data.

Authors:  Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.890

6.  Hospitalizations for gastrointestinal and cardiovascular events in the CADEUS cohort of traditional or Coxib NSAID users.

Authors:  David Laharie; Cécile Droz-Perroteau; Jacques Bénichou; Michel Amouretti; Patrick Blin; Bernard Bégaud; Estelle Guiard; Sylvie Dutoit; Stéphanie Lamarque; Yola Moride; Fanny Depont; Annie Fourrier-Réglat; Nicholas Moore
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.335

7.  Confounding adjustment via a semi-automated high-dimensional propensity score algorithm: an application to electronic medical records.

Authors:  Sengwee Toh; Luis A García Rodríguez; Miguel A Hernán
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 2.890

8.  Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: the CLASS study: A randomized controlled trial. Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety Study.

Authors:  F E Silverstein; G Faich; J L Goldstein; L S Simon; T Pincus; A Whelton; R Makuch; G Eisen; N M Agrawal; W F Stenson; A M Burr; W W Zhao; J D Kent; J B Lefkowith; K M Verburg; G S Geis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-09-13       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Confounder summary scores when comparing the effects of multiple drug exposures.

Authors:  Suzanne M Cadarette; Joshua J Gagne; Daniel H Solomon; Jeffrey N Katz; Til Stürmer
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.890

Review 10.  Gastrointestinal safety of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: a Cochrane Collaboration systematic review.

Authors:  Alaa Rostom; Katherine Muir; Catherine Dubé; Emilie Jolicoeur; Michel Boucher; Janet Joyce; Peter Tugwell; George W Wells
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2007-06-06       Impact factor: 11.382

View more
  27 in total

1.  Long-term Outcomes Associated With Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator in Adults With Chronic Kidney Disease.

Authors:  Nisha Bansal; Adam Szpiro; Kristi Reynolds; David H Smith; David J Magid; Jerry H Gurwitz; Frederick Masoudi; Robert T Greenlee; Grace H Tabada; Sue Hee Sung; Ashveena Dighe; Alan S Go
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 21.873

2.  On the role of marginal confounder prevalence - implications for the high-dimensional propensity score algorithm.

Authors:  Tibor Schuster; Menglan Pang; Robert W Platt
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 2.890

3.  Evaluating large-scale propensity score performance through real-world and synthetic data experiments.

Authors:  Yuxi Tian; Martijn J Schuemie; Marc A Suchard
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  The Potential of High-Dimensional Propensity Scores in Health Services Research: An Exemplary Study on the Quality of Care for Elective Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.

Authors:  Dirk Enders; Christoph Ohlmeier; Edeltraut Garbe
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Effectiveness and safety of 110 or 150 mg dabigatran vs. vitamin K antagonists in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Patrick Blin; Caroline Dureau-Pournin; Yves Cottin; Jacques Bénichou; Patrick Mismetti; Abdelilah Abouelfath; Regis Lassalle; Cécile Droz; Nicholas Moore
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-12-16       Impact factor: 4.335

6.  Gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage in concomitant users of warfarin and antihyperlipidemics.

Authors:  Charles E Leonard; Colleen M Brensinger; Warren B Bilker; Stephen E Kimmel; Xu Han; Young Hee Nam; Joshua J Gagne; Margaret J Mangaali; Sean Hennessy
Journal:  Int J Cardiol       Date:  2016-11-12       Impact factor: 4.164

7.  Collaborative-controlled LASSO for constructing propensity score-based estimators in high-dimensional data.

Authors:  Cheng Ju; Richard Wyss; Jessica M Franklin; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Jenny Häggström; Mark J van der Laan
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2017-12-11       Impact factor: 3.021

8.  Digoxin and risk of death in adults with atrial fibrillation: the ATRIA-CVRN study.

Authors:  James V Freeman; Kristi Reynolds; Margaret Fang; Natalia Udaltsova; Anthony Steimle; Niela K Pomernacki; Leila H Borowsky; Teresa N Harrison; Daniel E Singer; Alan S Go
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2014-11-20

9.  Risk of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients treated with epoetins or blood transfusions.

Authors:  Antonios Douros; Kathrin Jobski; Bianca Kollhorst; Tania Schink; Edeltraut Garbe
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 4.335

10.  The past, present and perhaps future of pharmacovigilance: homage to Folke Sjoqvist.

Authors:  Nicholas Moore
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 2.953

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.