Patrick B Ryan1, Martijn J Schuemie, David Madigan. 1. Janssen Research and Development LLC, 1125 Trenton-Harbourton Road, Room K30205, PO Box 200, Titusville, NJ, 08560, USA, ryan@omop.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Observational healthcare data offer the potential to enable identification of risks of medical products, but appropriate methodology has not yet been defined. The self-controlled cohort method, which compares the post-exposure outcome rate with the pre-exposure rate among an exposed cohort, has been proposed as a potential approach for risk identification but its performance has not been fully assessed. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of the self-controlled cohort method as a tool for risk identification in observational healthcare data. RESEARCH DESIGN: The method was applied to 399 drug-outcome scenarios (165 positive controls and 234 negative controls across 4 health outcomes of interest) in 5 real observational databases (4 administrative claims and 1 electronic health record) and in 6 simulated datasets with no effect and injected relative risks of 1.25, 1.5, 2, 4, and 10, respectively. MEASURES: Method performance was evaluated through area under ROC curve (AUC), bias, and coverage probability. RESULTS: The self-controlled cohort design achieved strong predictive accuracy across the outcomes and databases under study, with the top-performing settings exceeding AUC >0.76 in all scenarios. However, the estimates generated were observed to be highly biased with low coverage probability. CONCLUSIONS: If the objective for a risk identification system is one of discrimination, the self-controlled cohort method shows promise as a potential tool for risk identification. However, if a system is intended to generate effect estimates to quantify the magnitude of potential risks, the self-controlled cohort method may not be suitable, and requires substantial calibration to be properly interpreted under nominal properties.
BACKGROUND: Observational healthcare data offer the potential to enable identification of risks of medical products, but appropriate methodology has not yet been defined. The self-controlled cohort method, which compares the post-exposure outcome rate with the pre-exposure rate among an exposed cohort, has been proposed as a potential approach for risk identification but its performance has not been fully assessed. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of the self-controlled cohort method as a tool for risk identification in observational healthcare data. RESEARCH DESIGN: The method was applied to 399 drug-outcome scenarios (165 positive controls and 234 negative controls across 4 health outcomes of interest) in 5 real observational databases (4 administrative claims and 1 electronic health record) and in 6 simulated datasets with no effect and injected relative risks of 1.25, 1.5, 2, 4, and 10, respectively. MEASURES: Method performance was evaluated through area under ROC curve (AUC), bias, and coverage probability. RESULTS: The self-controlled cohort design achieved strong predictive accuracy across the outcomes and databases under study, with the top-performing settings exceeding AUC >0.76 in all scenarios. However, the estimates generated were observed to be highly biased with low coverage probability. CONCLUSIONS: If the objective for a risk identification system is one of discrimination, the self-controlled cohort method shows promise as a potential tool for risk identification. However, if a system is intended to generate effect estimates to quantify the magnitude of potential risks, the self-controlled cohort method may not be suitable, and requires substantial calibration to be properly interpreted under nominal properties.
Authors: Patrick B Ryan; Paul E Stang; J Marc Overhage; Marc A Suchard; Abraham G Hartzema; William DuMouchel; Christian G Reich; Martijn J Schuemie; David Madigan Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Gianluca Trifirò; Antoine Pariente; Preciosa M Coloma; Jan A Kors; Giovanni Polimeni; Ghada Miremont-Salamé; Maria Antonietta Catania; Francesco Salvo; Anaelle David; Nicholas Moore; Achille Patrizio Caputi; Miriam Sturkenboom; Mariam Molokhia; Julia Hippisley-Cox; Carlos Diaz Acedo; Johan van der Lei; Annie Fourrier-Reglat Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Patrick B Ryan; Martijn J Schuemie; Emily Welebob; Jon Duke; Sarah Valentine; Abraham G Hartzema Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Martijn J Schuemie; M Soledad Cepeda; Marc A Suchard; Jianxiao Yang; Yuxi Tian; Alejandro Schuler; Patrick B Ryan; David Madigan; George Hripcsak Journal: Harv Data Sci Rev Date: 2020-01-31
Authors: Martijn J Schuemie; Rosa Gini; Preciosa M Coloma; Huub Straatman; Ron M C Herings; Lars Pedersen; Francesco Innocenti; Giampiero Mazzaglia; Gino Picelli; Johan van der Lei; Miriam C J M Sturkenboom Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Paul E Stang; Patrick B Ryan; J Marc Overhage; Martijn J Schuemie; Abraham G Hartzema; Emily Welebob Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Patrick B Ryan; Paul E Stang; J Marc Overhage; Marc A Suchard; Abraham G Hartzema; William DuMouchel; Christian G Reich; Martijn J Schuemie; David Madigan Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: G Niklas Norén; Tomas Bergvall; Patrick B Ryan; Kristina Juhlin; Martijn J Schuemie; David Madigan Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Patrick B Ryan; Martijn J Schuemie; Emily Welebob; Jon Duke; Sarah Valentine; Abraham G Hartzema Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Richard D Boyce; Patrick B Ryan; G Niklas Norén; Martijn J Schuemie; Christian Reich; Jon Duke; Nicholas P Tatonetti; Gianluca Trifirò; Rave Harpaz; J Marc Overhage; Abraham G Hartzema; Mark Khayter; Erica A Voss; Christophe G Lambert; Vojtech Huser; Michel Dumontier Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 5.606