Feasibility of capturing real-world data from health information technology systems at multiple centers to assess cardiac ablation device outcomes: A fit-for-purpose informatics analysis report
Abstract Objective The study sought to conduct an informatics analysis on the National Evaluation System for Health Technology Coordinating Center test case of cardiac ablation catheters and to demonstrate the role of informatics approaches in the feasibility assessment of capturing real-world data using unique device identifiers (UDIs) that are fit for purpose for label extensions for 2 cardiac ablation catheters from the electronic health records and other health information technology systems in a multicenter evaluation. Materials and Methods We focused on data capture and transformation and data quality maturity model specified in the National Evaluation System for Health Technology Coordinating Center data quality framework. The informatics analysis included 4 elements: the use of UDIs for identifying device exposure data, the use of standardized codes for defining computable phenotypes, the use of natural language processing for capturing unstructured data elements from clinical data systems, and the use of common data models for standardizing data collection and analyses. Results We found that, with the UDI implementation at 3 health systems, the target device exposure data could be effectively identified, particularly for brand-specific devices. Computable phenotypes for study outcomes could be defined using codes; however, ablation registries, natural language processing tools, and chart reviews were required for validating data quality of the phenotypes. The common data model implementation status varied across sites. The maturity level of the key informatics technologies was highly aligned with the data quality maturity model. Conclusions We demonstrated that the informatics approaches can be feasibly used to capture safety and effectiveness outcomes in real-world data for use in medical device studies supporting label extensions.
Uptake of evidence by physicians: De-adoption of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents after TREAT trial showed they are ineffective and unsafe
Abstract Variation in de-adoption of ineffective or unsafe treatments is not well-understood. We examined de-adoption of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) in anemia treatment among patients with chronic kidney diseases (CKD) following new clinical evidence of harm and ineffectiveness (the TREAT trial) and the FDA's revision of its safety warning. We used an interrupted time series approach to estimate changes in use of epoetin alfa (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa (DPO) in the commercial and Medicare Advantage (MA) and Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) populations. We also examined how changes in both trends and levels of use were associated with physicians’ characteristics. Study cohort included patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 during 2007-2015. Use of DPO and EPO declined over the study period. There were no consistent changes in DPO trend across insurance groups, but the level of DPO use decreased right after the FDA revision in all groups. The decline in EPO use trend was faster after the TREAT trial for all groups. Nephrologists were largely more responsive to evidence than primary care physicians. Differences by physician's gender, and age were not consistent across insurance populations and types of ESA.
Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
AbstractObjectiveTo describe physicians’ variation in de‐adopting concurrent statin and fibrate therapy for type 2 diabetic patients following a reversal in clinical evidence.Data SourcesWe analyzed 2007‐2015 claims data from OptumLabs® Data Warehouse, a longitudinal, real‐world data asset with de‐identified administrative claims and electronic health record data.Study DesignWe modeled fibrate use among Medicare Advantage and commercially insured type 2 diabetic statin users before and after the publication of the ACCORD lipid trial, which found statins and fibrates were no more effective than statins alone in reducing cardiovascular events among type 2 diabetic patients. We modeled fibrate use trends with physician random effects and physician characteristics such as age and specialty.Data ExtractionWe identified patient‐year‐quarters with one year of continuous insurance enrollment, type 2 diabetes diagnoses, and fibrate use. We designated the physician most responsible for patients’ diabetes care based on evaluation and management visits and prescriptions of glucose‐lowering drugs.Principal FindingsFibrate use increased by 0.12 percentage points per quarter among commercial patients (95% CI, 0.10 to 0.14) and 0.17 percentage points per quarter among Medicare Advantage patients (95% CI, 0.13 to 0.20) before the trial and then decreased by 0.16 percentage points per quarter among commercial patients (95% CI, −0.18 to −0.15) and 0.05 percentage points per quarter among Medicare Advantage patients (95% CI, −0.06 to −0.03) after the trial. However, 45% of physicians treating commercial patients and 48% of physicians treating Medicare Advantage patients had positive trends in prescribing following the trial. Physicians’ characteristics did not explain their variation (pseudo R2 = 0.000).ConclusionOn average, physicians decreased fibrate prescribing following the ACCORD lipid trial. However, many physicians increased prescribing following the trial. Observable physician characteristics did not explain variations in prescribing. Future research should examine whether physicians vary similarly in other de‐adoption settings.
Comparison of Diabetes Medications Used by Adults With Commercial Insurance vs Medicare Advantage, 2016 to 2019
Background: Patients with atrial fibrillation and severely decreased kidney function were excluded from the pivotal non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) trials, thereby raising questions about comparative safety and effectiveness in patients with reduced kidney function. The study aimed to compare oral anticoagulants across the range of kidney function in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results: Using a US administrative claims database with linked laboratory data, 34 569 new users of oral anticoagulants with atrial fibrillation and estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥15 mL/(min·1.73 m 2 ) were identified between October 1, 2010 to November 29, 2017. The proportion of patients using NOACs declined with decreasing kidney function—73.5%, 69.6%, 65.4%, 59.5%, and 45.0% of the patients were prescribed a NOAC in estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥90, 60 to 90, 45 to 60, 30 to 45, 15 to 30 mL/min per 1.73 m 2 groups, respectively. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance 4 treatment groups (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin) on 66 baseline characteristics. In comparison to warfarin, apixaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57 [0.43–0.75]; P <0.001), major bleeding (HR, 0.51 [0.44–0.61]; P <0.001), and mortality (HR, 0.68 [0.56–0.83]; P <0.001); dabigatran was associated with a similar risk of stroke but a lower risk of major bleeding (HR, 0.57 [0.43–0.75]; P <0.001) and mortality (HR, 0.68 [0.48-0.98]; P =0.04); rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke (HR, 0.69 [0.51–0.94]; P =0.02), major bleeding (HR, 0.84 [0.72–0.99]; P =0.04), and mortality (HR, 0.73 [0.58–0.91]; P =0.006). There was no significant interaction between treatment and estimated glomerular filtration rate categories for any outcome. When comparing one NOAC to another NOAC, there was no significant difference in mortality, but some differences existed for stroke or major bleeding. No relationship between treatments and falsification end points was found, suggesting no evidence for substantial residual confounding. Conclusions: Relative to warfarin, NOACs are used less frequently as kidney function declines. However, NOACs appears to have similar or better comparative effectiveness and safety across the range of kidney function.
Comparative Effectiveness of Generic vs Brand-Name Levothyroxine in Achieving Normal Thyrotropin Levels