Laura Pazzagli1, Lena Brandt2, Marie Linder2, David Myers3, Panagiotis Mavros4, Morten Andersen2,5, Shahram Bahmanyar2,6. 1. Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, S-171 76, Stockholm, Sweden. laura.pazzagli@ki.se. 2. Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, S-171 76, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. The Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Cilag AB, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Janssen Scientific Affairs, Titusville, NJ, USA. 5. Department of Drug Design and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 6. The Center for Psychiatry Research, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the impact on exposure time and outcome misclassifications, and consequent impact on exposure-outcome associations from treatment episode construction. We investigated the dosage assumptions of 1 unit per day, and 1 DDD per day, versus actual prescribed dosage under different handling of gaps and overlaps of prescriptions. METHODS: Data on mirtazapine and citalopram exposure (years 2006-2014) from the Swedish Prescribed Drug register were used. Via a within individuals design we compared method A, based on actual dosage, with methods B and C based on 1 unit of drug per day and 1 DDD per day assumptions, respectively, including consideration of gaps and overlaps. Four outcomes were used, hospitalizations and outpatient visits for all and for psychiatric causes. RESULTS: Relative to method A, both alternative methods lead to misclassification of exposure time. With regard to outcome misclassifications, method B overestimates the effect of the exposure on the outcome in 77% and 100% of exposure definition comparisons for mirtazapine and citalopram respectively, while 23% of the comparisons for mirtazapine results in underestimation of exposure-outcome associations. Conversely, treatment episodes based on DDD (method C) result in underestimation of the exposure-outcome association in 100% and 87.5% of exposure definition comparisons for mirtazapine and citalopram respectively, while 12.5% of the comparisons for citalopram results in overestimation of the exposure-outcome associations. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides results that have consistent clinical relevance. We have showed that a non-accurate construction of exposure time may lead to errors on outcome detection during exposed time, and consequently affect conclusions on safety or efficacy profile of a treatment.
PURPOSE: To assess the impact on exposure time and outcome misclassifications, and consequent impact on exposure-outcome associations from treatment episode construction. We investigated the dosage assumptions of 1 unit per day, and 1 DDD per day, versus actual prescribed dosage under different handling of gaps and overlaps of prescriptions. METHODS: Data on mirtazapine and citalopram exposure (years 2006-2014) from the Swedish Prescribed Drug register were used. Via a within individuals design we compared method A, based on actual dosage, with methods B and C based on 1 unit of drug per day and 1 DDD per day assumptions, respectively, including consideration of gaps and overlaps. Four outcomes were used, hospitalizations and outpatient visits for all and for psychiatric causes. RESULTS: Relative to method A, both alternative methods lead to misclassification of exposure time. With regard to outcome misclassifications, method B overestimates the effect of the exposure on the outcome in 77% and 100% of exposure definition comparisons for mirtazapine and citalopram respectively, while 23% of the comparisons for mirtazapine results in underestimation of exposure-outcome associations. Conversely, treatment episodes based on DDD (method C) result in underestimation of the exposure-outcome association in 100% and 87.5% of exposure definition comparisons for mirtazapine and citalopram respectively, while 12.5% of the comparisons for citalopram results in overestimation of the exposure-outcome associations. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides results that have consistent clinical relevance. We have showed that a non-accurate construction of exposure time may lead to errors on outcome detection during exposed time, and consequently affect conclusions on safety or efficacy profile of a treatment.
Authors: Tomi Romppainen; Maria Rikala; Emma Aarnio; Maarit Jaana Korhonen; Leena K Saastamoinen; Risto Huupponen Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2014-08-22 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Eva Lesén; Tatiana Z Sandström; Anders Carlsten; Anna K Jönsson; Ann-Charlotte Mårdby; Karolina Andersson Sundell Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2011-08-19 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Sinikka Sihvo; Kristian Wahlbeck; Alison McCallum; Tiina Sevon; Martti Arffman; Jari Haukka; Ilmo Keskimäki; Elina Hemminki Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Helga Gardarsdottir; Erica C G van Geffen; Joost J Stolker; Toine C G Egberts; Eibert R Heerdink Journal: J Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 3.153
Authors: Miriam Qvarnström; Thomas Kahan; Helle Kieler; Lena Brandt; Jan Hasselström; Kristina Bengtsson Boström; Karin Manhem; Per Hjerpe; Björn Wettermark Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Stephen R Pye; Thérèse Sheppard; Rebecca M Joseph; Mark Lunt; Nadyne Girard; Jennifer S Haas; David W Bates; David L Buckeridge; Tjeerd P van Staa; Robyn Tamblyn; William G Dixon Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Ippazio Cosimo Antonazzo; Carla Fornari; Sandy Maumus-Robert; Eleonora Cei; Olga Paoletti; Pietro Ferrara; Sara Conti; Paolo Angelo Cortesi; Lorenzo Giovanni Mantovani; Rosa Gini; Giampiero Mazzaglia Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-01-28
Authors: Ippazio Cosimo Antonazzo; Carla Fornari; Sandy Maumus-Robert; Eleonora Cei; Olga Paoletti; Sara Conti; Paolo Angelo Cortesi; Lorenzo Giovanni Mantovani; Rosa Gini; Giampiero Mazzaglia Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 3.390