Accounting for missing data caused by drug cessation in observational comparative effectiveness research: a simulation study.
arthritis
epidemiology
health care
outcome assessment
rheumatoid
Journal
Annals of the rheumatic diseases
ISSN: 1468-2060
Titre abrégé: Ann Rheum Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0372355
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2022
05 2022
Historique:
received:
10
09
2021
accepted:
20
12
2021
pubmed:
15
1
2022
medline:
13
4
2022
entrez:
14
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the performance of statistical methods used to compare the effectiveness between drugs in an observational setting in the presence of attrition. In this simulation study, we compared the estimations of low disease activity (LDA) at 1 year produced by complete case analysis (CC), last observation carried forward (LOCF), LUNDEX, non-responder imputation (NRI), inverse probability weighting (IPW) and multiple imputations of the outcome. All methods were adjusted for confounders. The reasons to stop the treatments were included in the multiple imputation method (confounder-adjusted response rate with attrition correction, CARRAC) and were either included (IPW2) or not (IPW1) in the IPW method. A realistic simulation data set was generated from a real-world data collection. The amount of missing data caused by attrition and its dependence on the 'true' value of the data missing were varied to assess the robustness of each method to these changes. LUNDEX and NRI strongly underestimated the absolute LDA difference between two treatments, and their estimates were highly sensitive to the amount of attrition. IPW1 and CC overestimated the absolute LDA difference between the two treatments and the overestimation increased with increasing attrition or when missingness depended on disease activity at 1 year. IPW2 and CARRAC produced unbiased estimations, but IPW2 had a greater sensitivity to the missing pattern of data and the amount of attrition than CARRAC. Only multiple imputation and IPW2, which considered both confounding and treatment cessation reasons, produced accurate comparative effectiveness estimates.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35027398
pii: annrheumdis-2021-221477
doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-221477
pmc: PMC8995805
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
729-736Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2021 Feb 1;60(2):820-828
pubmed: 32810263
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Oct;68(10):1165-75
pubmed: 25920943
EBioMedicine. 2016 Sep;11:302-306
pubmed: 27558858
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019 Jan 21;:
pubmed: 30668875
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Jul 23;19(1):161
pubmed: 31345166
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2018 Feb;23(1):21-22
pubmed: 29367321
Lancet. 1990 Sep 1;336(8714):542-5
pubmed: 1975045
J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Oct;59(10):1102-9
pubmed: 16980151
Arthritis Rheum. 2007 Oct;56(10):3226-35
pubmed: 17907167
Am J Epidemiol. 2004 Apr 1;159(7):702-6
pubmed: 15033648
Epidemiology. 2016 Jan;27(1):91-7
pubmed: 26484424
Pain. 2012 Feb;153(2):265-268
pubmed: 22055553
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013 Jul;65(7):1183-9
pubmed: 23335345
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Nov 19;14:118
pubmed: 25407057
Ann Rheum Dis. 2022 May;81(5):729-736
pubmed: 35027398
Stat Methods Med Res. 2013 Jun;22(3):278-95
pubmed: 21220355
RMD Open. 2019 Oct 17;5(2):e000994
pubmed: 31673410
Ann Rheum Dis. 2022 Jan 20;:
pubmed: 35058229
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Feb;54(2):600-6
pubmed: 16447237
Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Sep 15;168(6):656-64
pubmed: 18682488
Int J Epidemiol. 1992 Oct;21(5):837-41
pubmed: 1468842
RMD Open. 2020 May;6(1):
pubmed: 32393523
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2016 Jul;55(7):1295-300
pubmed: 27044884
Am J Epidemiol. 2007 Dec 1;166(11):1337-44
pubmed: 18000021
Bone Res. 2018 Apr 27;6:15
pubmed: 29736302
Epidemiology. 2012 Sep;23(5):729-32
pubmed: 22584299