首页> 外文期刊>Comparative Effectiveness Research >Interpreting the quality of health care database studies on the comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in routine care
【24h】

Interpreting the quality of health care database studies on the comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulants in routine care

机译:解释关于口服抗凝剂在常规护理中的相对有效性的医疗保健数据库研究的质量

获取原文
       

摘要

Background: Dabigatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor, has now been available for 2 years in the US for the prevention of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, and direct Xa inhibitors are also starting to enter the market. Studies examining the effects of new oral anticoagulants in health care databases are beginning to emerge. The purpose of this study was to describe the validity of early published observational studies on the comparative safety and effectiveness of new oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods: We identified published nonrandomized post-marketing studies (articles or conference abstracts or posters) and critically appraised their internal validity, with a particular focus on their ability to control confounding and other biases. Results: Two full-length journal articles, three conference posters, two conference presentation abstracts, and a US Food and Drug Administration analysis form the basis of the early comparative effectiveness and safety experience with new oral anticoagulants. Some published studies exhibit substantial biases and have insufficient precision for several important endpoints. Several studies suffer from biases arising from comparing ongoing users of the older drug, warfarin, who seem to tolerate it, to initiators of the new treatment who may have switched from warfarin or have had no prior experience with anticoagulants. Analyses tended to not adjust or not adjust adequately for confounding, and unsound propensity score application was also observed. Several studies introduced selection bias by excluding patients who died during follow-up and by restricting the study population to those with continuous database enrollment following cohort entry. We describe how these deficiencies can be avoided when studying new drugs. Conclusion: The first published post-marketing observational studies may not be sufficient for decision-makers to assess fully the comparative effectiveness and safety of new oral anticoagulants. These studies have methodologic challenges that can be avoided by using sound pharmacoepidemiologic design and analysis strategies.
机译:背景:达比加群(Dabigatran)是一种口服凝血酶直接抑制剂,目前已在美国上市两年,用于预防非瓣膜性房颤患者的中风,并且直接Xa抑制剂也开始进入市场。关于新型口服抗凝剂在医疗保健数据库中作用的研究开始出现。这项研究的目的是描述早期发表的观察性研究对新型口服抗凝药在房颤患者中的相对安全性和有效性的有效性。方法:我们确定了已发表的非随机售后研究(文章或会议摘要或海报),并严格评估了它们的内部有效性,尤其侧重于其控制混淆和其他偏见的能力。结果:两篇完整的期刊文章,三篇会议海报,两篇会议演讲摘要以及美国食品和药物管理局的分析构成了新型口服抗凝剂早期比较有效性和安全性经验的基础。一些已发表的研究显示出严重的偏差,并且对于几个重要的终点没有足够的精度。有几项研究存在偏见,原因是将正在使用的较旧药物华法林(似乎可以耐受)与可能已从华法林转用或以前没有抗凝剂经验的新疗法的发起者进行比较,从而产生了偏见。分析往往无法调整或无法充分调整以消除混淆,并且还观察到了不良的倾向评分应用。几项研究引入了选择偏见,其方法是排除随访中死亡的患者,并限制研究人群为队列输入后连续数据库登记的患者。我们描述了在研究新药时如何避免这些缺陷。结论:首次发表的上市后观察性研究可能不足以使决策者充分评估新型口服抗凝剂的相对有效性和安全性。这些研究具有方法上的挑战,可以通过使用合理的药物流行病学设计和分析策略来避免。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号