Comparison of Different Case-Crossover Variants in Handling Exposure-Time Trend or Persistent-User Bias: Using Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and the Risk of Heart Failure as an Example

Thinking Three-Dimensionally: A Self- and Externally-Controlled Approach to Screening for Drug-Drug-Drug Interactions Among High-Risk Populations

The global rise in polypharmacy has increased both the necessity and complexity of drug-drug interaction (DDI) assessments, given the growing potential for interactions involving more than two drugs. Leveraging large-scale healthcare claims data, we piloted a semi-automated, high-throughput case-crossover-based approach for drug-drug-drug interaction (3DI) screening. Cases were direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) users with either a major bleeding event during ongoing dispensings for potentially interacting, enzyme-inhibiting antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) (Study 1), or a thromboembolic event during ongoing dispensings for potentially interacting, enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (ASMs) (Study 2). 3DI detection was based on screening for additional drug exposures that served as acute outcome triggers. To mitigate direct effects and confounding by concomitant drugs, self-controlled estimates were adjusted using negative cases (external "control" DOAC users with the same outcomes but co-dispensings for non-interacting AHDs or ASMs). Signal thresholds were set based on P-values and false discovery rate q-values to address multiple comparisons. Study 1: 285 drugs were examined among 3,306 episodes. Self-controlled assessments with q-value thresholds yielded 9 3DI signals (cases) and 40 DDI signals (negative cases). External adjustment generated 10 3DI signals from the P-value threshold and no signals from the q-value threshold. Study 2: 126 drugs were examined among 604 episodes. Assessments with P-value thresholds yielded 3 3DI and 26 DDI signals following self-control, as well as 4 3DI signals following adjustment. No 3DI signals met the q-value threshold. The presented self- and externally-controlled approach aimed to advance paradigms for real-world higher order drug interaction screening among high-susceptibility populations with pre-existent DDI risk.

Benzodiazepine Use During Pregnancy and Risk of Miscarriage

Importance

Benzodiazepine use during pregnancy has raised significant concerns due to the potential harmful effects of this drug class on neonates. Studies on the association between benzodiazepine use and the risk of miscarriage are limited.

Objective

To quantify the risk of miscarriage associated with benzodiazepine use during pregnancy after controlling for unmeasured confounders and exposure time trends.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a nationwide, population-based case-time-control study using Taiwan's National Birth Certificate Application database and the National Health Insurance database. Pregnancies resulting in miscarriage between 2004 and 2018 were included in the case group and were 1:1 matched with exposure time-trend control individuals using disease risk score, considering demographic characteristics and prepregnancy comorbidities. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to March 2023.

Exposures

Discordant exposures to benzodiazepines during risk period (1-28 days before miscarriage) and 2 reference periods (31-58 days and 181-208 days before the last menstrual period) were compared for each pregnancy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Miscarriage was defined as any pregnancy loss occurring between the first prenatal care visit (usually 8 weeks) and the 19th completed week of pregnancy.

Results

This study comprised a total of 3 067 122 pregnancies among 1 957 601 women, 136 134 of which (4.4%) resulted in miscarriage. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 30.61 (5.91) years. The use of benzodiazepines during pregnancy was associated with an increased risk of miscarriage (odds ratio [OR], 1.69; 95% CI, 1.52-1.87), and consistent findings were observed across multiple sensitivity analyses considering different time windows and accounting for misclassification. In subgroup analyses, an increased risk of miscarriage was associated with each commonly used individual benzodiazepine, ranging from case-time-control ORs of 1.39 (95% CI, 1.17-1.66) for alprazolam to 2.52 (95% CI, 1.89-3.36) for fludiazepam.

Conclusions and Relevance

This nationwide case-time-control study revealed an increased risk of miscarriage associated with benzodiazepine use during pregnancy after accounting for measurable confounders, and results were unlikely to be due to unmeasured confounding. These findings underscore the necessity for health care professionals to meticulously balance the risk-benefit ratio when considering the use of benzodiazepines to treat psychiatric and sleep disorders during pregnancy.

Evaluating the use of methods to mitigate bias from non-transient medications in the case-crossover design: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The case-crossover design is a self-controlled study design used to compare exposure immediately preceding an event occurrence with exposure in earlier control periods. The design is most suitable for transient exposures in order to avoid biases that can be problematic when using the case-crossover design for non-transient (i.e., chronic) exposures. Our goal was to conduct a systematic review of case-crossover studies and its variants (case-time-control and case-case-time-control) in order to compare design and analysis choices by medication type.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search to identify recent case-crossover, case-time-control, and case-case-time-control studies focused on medication exposures. Articles indexed in MEDLINE and EMBASE using these study designs that were published between January 2015 and December 2021 in the English language were identified. Reviews, methodological studies, commentaries, articles without medications as the exposure of interest, and articles with no available full text were excluded. Study characteristics including study design, outcome, risk window, control window, reporting of discordant pairs, and inclusion of sensitivity analyses were summarized overall and by medication type. We further evaluated the implementation of recommended methods to account for biases introduced by non-transient exposures among articles that used the case-crossover design on a non-transient exposure.

RESULTS

Of the 2036 articles initially identified, 114 articles were included. The case-crossover was the most common study design (88%), followed by the case-time-control (17%), and case-case-time-control (3%). Fifty-three percent of the articles included only transient medications, 35% included only non-transient medications, and 12% included both. Across years, the proportion of case-crossover articles evaluating a non-transient medication ranged from 30% in 2018 to 69% in 2017. We found that 41% of the articles that evaluated a non-transient medication did not apply any of the recommended methods to account for biases and more than half of which were conducted by authors with no previous publication history of case-crossover studies.

CONCLUSION

Using the case-crossover design to evaluate a non-transient medication remains common in pharmacoepidemiology. Researchers should apply appropriate design and analysis choices when opting to use a case-crossover design with non-transient medication exposures.

Risk of parkinsonism and related movement disorders with gabapentinoids or tramadol: A case-crossover study

INTRODUCTION

A safety signal concerning parkinsonism and related movement disorders with gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) or tramadol was detected by reviewing individual case reports and data mining in spontaneous report databases. Well-designed pharmacoepidemiological studies are needed to assess the signal.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the association of exposure to gabapentinoids or tramadol with the risk of parkinsonism and related movement disorders.

METHODS

We conducted a case-crossover study using a Japanese electronic medical records database. Patients with newly diagnosed parkinsonism or related movement disorders between January 1, 2007, and April 14, 2019, were identified. The diagnosis date of outcomes was defined as the index date. We assessed the exposure of each patient to gabapentinoids or tramadol during a 90-day hazard period ending 1 day before the index date and in three 90-day reference periods. Multivariable conditional logistic regression models were employed to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). To confirm the robustness of the primary findings, we also performed sensitivity analyses using a case-case-time-control design, a different time window for hazard and reference periods, a different definition of outcome, and different number of reference periods.

RESULTS

A total of 28,972 eligible cases were included in the primary analysis. Exposure to gabapentinoids (aOR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.73-2.61) and tramadol (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.57-2.64) was associated with increased risk. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Our findings serve as a caution to physicians who prescribe gabapentinoids or tramadol in routine clinical practice.

Effect of metformin on adverse outcomes in T2DM patients: Systemic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background

The cardiovascular protection effect of metformin on patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remains inconclusive. This systemic review and meta-analysis were to estimate the effect of metformin on mortality and cardiovascular events among patients with T2DM.

Methods

A search of the Pubmed and EMBASE databases up to December 2021 was performed. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by a random-effects model with an inverse variance method.

Results

A total of 39 studies involving 2473009 T2DM patients were adopted. Compared to non-metformin therapy, the use of metformin was not significantly associated with a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (HR = 1.06, 95%CI 0.91–1.22; I² = 82%), hospitalization (HR = 0.85, 95%CI 0.64–1.13; I² = 98%), heart failure (HR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.60–1.25; I² = 99%), stroke (HR = 1.16, 95%CI 0.88–1.53; I² = 84%), and risk of AMI (HR = 0.88, 95%CI 0.69–1.14; I² = 88%) in T2DM patients. Metformin was also not associated with significantly lowered risk of MACE compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) in T2DM patients (HR = 0.95, 95%CI 0.73–1.23; I² = 84%).

Conclusions

The effect of metformin on some cardiovascular outcomes was not significantly better than the non-metformin therapy or DPP-4i in T2DM patients based on observational studies.

Risk of vaso-occlusive episode after exposure to corticosteroids in patients with sickle cell disease

Vaso-occlusive episodes (VOEs) are a major concern in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD). Exposure to systemic corticosteroids has been suspected to increase the occurrence of VOEs in case reports or series. No comparative study has been conducted to investigate this risk, which is still debated. Several clinical trials demonstrated the effectiveness of corticosteroids for the treatment of VOEs, but with increased rates of readmission. The aim of the study was to assess the risk of hospitalization for VOE associated with exposure to systemic corticosteroids in patients with SCD. We used a case-case-time control design in a nationwide population-based cohort built in the French national health insurance database between 2010 and 2018. The population included all patients with SCD with at least one hospitalization for VOE. Corticosteroids were identified using out-of-hospital dispensing data. The outcome was the first hospitalization for VOE. The case-case-time-control design induces self-adjustment for time-invariant confounders, including genotype. Analyses were adjusted for time-dependent confounders (infections, red blood transfusions) and stratified by exposure to hydroxyurea. Overall, 5,151 patients were included in the main analysis. Corticosteroid exposure was significantly associated with the occurrence of hospitalizations for VOEs: adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 3.8 (95% Confidence Interval - CI: 2.4-5.6). In patients exposed to hydroxyurea, the aOR was 2.6 (95% CI: 1.1-6.4); it was 4.0 (95% CI: 2.5-6.3) in unexposed patients. These results were consistent in children and adults. In conclusion, systemic corticosteroids were associated to an increased risk of hospitalization for VOE and should be limited in patients with SCD.

Association between tramadol use and seizures: A nationwide case-case-time-control study

PURPOSE

Tramadol may lower the seizure threshold; however, there is no conclusive evidence to confirm this. This study aimed to determine whether the use of tramadol is associated with the occurrence of seizures.

METHODS

We conducted a case-case-time-control (CCTC) study by identifying patients who had received tramadol and seizure diagnosis in a nationwide healthcare database in South Korea between 2003 and 2015. Each case was matched for age and sex to one future case to adjust for time trends in exposure without selection bias from the use of an external control group. The use of tramadol was assessed during a risk period of 1-30 days, and two reference periods, 61-90 days and 91-120 days, preceding the first diagnosis of seizures. We calculated the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) by dividing the OR in cases (case-crossover) by the OR in future cases (control-crossover). We performed a dose-response analysis using the average daily dose.

RESULTS

We identified 2,523 incident cases with matched future cases (mean age, 45.4 years; 50% men). The aOR for seizure with tramadol use was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.43) in the CCTC analysis, with a case-crossover OR of 1.19 (0.98-1.43) and control-crossover OR of 1.27 (1.03-1.56). The dose-response analysis showed a similar trend in the main analysis: a low-dose aOR of 0.80 (0.50-1.28) and a high-dose aOR of 0.92 (0.41-2.11).

CONCLUSION

We could not identify a significant association between transient use of tramadol and incidence of seizures in clinical practice.