Citations

Background/aims There has been growing interest in better understanding the potential of observational research methods in medical product evaluation and regulatory decision-making. Previously, we used linked claims and electronic health record data to emulate two ongoing randomized controlled trials, characterizing the populations and results of each randomized controlled trial prior to publication of its results. Here, our objective was to compare the populations and results from the emulated trials with those of the now-published randomized controlled trials. Methods This study compared participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics and study results between the emulated trials, which used structured data from OptumLabs Data Warehouse, and the published PRONOUNCE and GRADE trials. First, we examined the feasibility of implementing the baseline participant characteristics included in the published PRONOUNCE and GRADE trials’ using real-world data and classified each variable as ascertainable, partially ascertainable, or not ascertainable. Second, we compared the emulated trials and published randomized controlled trials for baseline patient characteristics (concordance determined using standardized mean differences <0.20) and results of the primary and secondary endpoints (concordance determined by direction of effect estimates and statistical significance). Results The PRONOUNCE trial enrolled 544 participants, and the emulated trial included 2226 propensity score-matched participants. In the PRONOUNCE trial publication, one of the 32 baseline participant characteristics was listed as an exclusion criterion on ClinicalTrials.gov but was ultimately not used. Among the remaining 31 characteristics, 9 (29.0%) were ascertainable, 11 (35.5%) were partially ascertainable, and 10 (32.2%) were not ascertainable using structured data from OptumLabs. For one additional variable, the PRONOUNCE trial did not provide sufficient detail to allow its ascertainment. Of the nine variables that were ascertainable, values in the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial were discordant for 6 (66.7%). The primary endpoint of time from randomization to the first major adverse cardiovascular event and secondary endpoints of nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke were concordant between the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial. The GRADE trial enrolled 5047 participants, and the emulated trial included 7540 participants. In the GRADE trial publication, 8 of 34 (23.5%) baseline participant characteristics were ascertainable, 14 (41.2%) were partially ascertainable, and 11 (32.4%) were not ascertainable using structured data from OptumLabs. For one variable, the GRADE trial did not provide sufficient detail to allow for ascertainment. Of the eight variables that were ascertainable, values in the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial were discordant for 4 (50.0%). The primary endpoint of time to hemoglobin A1c ≥7.0% was mostly concordant between the emulated trial and the published randomized controlled trial. Conclusion Despite challenges, observational methods and real-world data can be leveraged in certain important situations for a more timely evaluation of drug effectiveness and safety in more diverse and representative patient populations.

Background Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) has reduced the risk of recurrent stroke in patients with cryptogenic strokes in randomized clinical trials. Whether PFO closure in clinical practice is associated with similar benefit remains unknown. Methods and Results We identified patients with PFO and a history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack who were treated with PFO closure or medical therapy in the OptumLabs database. The primary end point was recurrent ischemic stroke or systemic embolization. Secondary outcomes included mortality, all stroke, transient ischemic attack, and major bleeding. A total of 6668 propensity‐matched patients were included (PFO closure n=4111; medical therapy n=2557). The incidence of stroke or systemic embolization per 100 person‐years was 2.38 after PFO cohort and 2.99 with medical therapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 [95% CI, 0.68–1.05], P =0.13). Mortality was lower in the PFO closure cohort (1.78 versus 2.59 per 100 person‐years: HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.55–0.87], P =0.002). Falsification end points showed that this difference is unlikely to be completely explained by residual confounders. There were no significant differences between the groups in secondary end points including intracranial hemorrhage and major bleeding except for an increase in nonintracranial hemorrhage bleeding among patients treated with oral anticoagulation (1.42 versus 2.16 per 100 person‐years: HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.48–0.99], P =0.043). The main end point was consistent in subanalyses including patients <60 years of age, patients with prior stroke, and those treated after the publication of the positive PFO trials in 2017. Conclusions In contemporary US practice, PFO closure is not associated with lower rates of recurrent ischemic stroke or systemic embolization compared with medical therapy. Potential reasons for this discrepancy warrant further investigation.

ImportancePatterns of clinical utilization and comparative effectiveness of anticoagulants for cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) remain largely unexplored.ObjectivesTo assess patterns of and factors associated with anticoagulant use and to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of contemporary anticoagulants in patients with active cancer in a clinical setting.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study obtained deidentified OptumLabs electronic health record claims data from January 1, 2012, to September 30, 2019. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a primary cancer diagnosis (except skin cancer) during at least 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient visits within 6 months before the venous thromboembolism (VTE) date were included. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to September 2021.ExposuresThe patients were grouped according to the anticoagulant prescribed: (1) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), (2) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), and (3) warfarin.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOdds ratios (ORs) were used to present the association between factors of interest and utilization of anticoagulants. Main efficacy outcomes included risk of VTE recurrence and all-cause mortality. Main safety outcomes included the risk of hospitalization due to major bleeding. Relative treatment effect estimates were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs.ResultsThis study included 5100 patients (mean [SD] age, 66.3 [12.3] years; 2670 [52.4%] women; 799 [15.7%] Black, 389 [7.6%] Hispanic, and 3559 [69.8%] White individuals). Overall, 2512 (49.3%), 1488 (29.2%), and 1460 (28.6%) filled prescriptions for DOACs, LMWH, and warfarin, respectively. The median (IQR) treatment duration was 3.2 (1.0-6.5) months for DOACs, 3.1 (1.0-6.8) months for warfarin, and 1.8 (0.9-3.8) months for LWMH. Patients with lung (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.12-3.65), urological (OR, 1.94; 95% CI,1.08-3.49), gynecological (OR, 4.25; 95% CI, 2.31-7.82), and colorectal (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.20-4.32) cancer were associated with increased prescriptions for LMWH compared with DOACs. LMWH (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.14-1.90) and warfarin (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13-1.87) were associated with an increased risk of VTE recurrences compared with DOACs. LMWH was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.62-3.20) and higher all-cause mortality (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.15-2.25) compared with DOACs.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this comparative effectiveness study of claims-based data, patients with CAT received anticoagulation for a remarkably short duration in clinical settings. DOACs was associated with a lower risk of VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and mortality. Warfarin may still be considered for patients with contraindications to DOACs and those with poor persistence on LMWH.

Introduction: Prior AF screening trials demonstrated low yield, highlighting the need for more targeted approaches. An AI algorithm was developed to identify ECG signatures of AF risk during normal sinus rhythm, which has been validated in diverse external populations. Hypothesis: An AI-guided, targeted screening approach could improve the diagnosis of AF. Methods We conducted a pragmatic decentralized trial to prospectively recruit patients with stroke risk factors but no prior AF. The AI algorithm was applied to the ECGs performed in routine practice and divided patients into high- or low-risk groups. The primary endpoint was AF lasting ≥ 30 seconds on a subsequent 30-day continuous cardiac rhythm monitor. In a secondary analysis, trial participants were 1:1 propensity score-matched to real-world controls derived from the eligible but unenrolled population. Results A total of 1,003 patients from 40 U.S. states completed the study, with a mean age of 74 [SD 8.8] years. Over a mean of 22.3 days of continuous monitoring, AF was detected in 6 (1.6%) of low-risk patients and 48 (7.6%) of high-risk patients (OR 4.98 [2.11-11.75], p<0.001). Compared to usual care, AI-guided AF screening was associated with increased detection of AF (high-risk group: 4.2% vs. 11.1%, p<0.001; low-risk group: 0.9% vs. 2.4%, p=0.12) over a median follow-up of 10 months. Conclusions A prospective pragmatic study found that the AI a can risk-stratify a relatively uniform population (i.e., older adults at risk for stroke) to detect AF during short-term cardiac monitoring. Furthermore, when compared with usual care, AI-guided cardiac monitoring was associated with increased AF detection. As such, an AI-guided AF screening approach, leveraging existing EHR data and infrastructure, could be effective, patient-centered, and massively scalable, thereby reducing unnecessary health utilization and diagnosis-related anxiety (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04208971).

Background: A recent subanalysis of the EAST-AFNET 4 (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial) suggests a stronger benefit of early rhythm control (ERC) in patients with atrial fibrillation and a high comorbidity burden when compared to patients with a lower comorbidity burden. Methods: We identified 109 739 patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in a large United States deidentified administrative claims database (OptumLabs) and 11 625 patients in the population-based UKB (UK Biobank). ERC was defined as atrial fibrillation ablation or antiarrhythmic drug therapy within the first year after atrial fibrillation diagnosis. Patients were classified as (1) ERC and high comorbidity burden (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥4); (2) ERC and lower comorbidity burden (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score 2–3); (3) no ERC and high comorbidity burden; and (4) no ERC and lower comorbidity burden. Patients without an elevated comorbidity burden (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score 0–1) were excluded. Propensity score overlap weighting and cox proportional hazards regression were used to balance patients and compare groups for the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, stroke, or hospitalization with the diagnoses heart failure or myocardial infarction as well as for a primary composite safety outcome of death, stroke, and serious adverse events related to ERC. Results: In both cohorts, ERC was associated with a reduced risk for the primary composite outcome in patients with a high comorbidity burden (OptumLabs: hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI 0.72–0.95]; P =0.006; UKB: hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63–0.94]; P =0.009). In patients with a lower comorbidity burden, the difference in outcomes was not significant (OptumLabs: hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.54–1.57]; P =0.767; UKB: hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.83–1.06]; P =0.310). The comorbidity burden interacted with ERC in the UKB (interaction- P =0.027) but not in OptumLabs (interaction- P =0.720). ERC was not associated with an increased risk for the primary safety outcome. Conclusions: ERC is safe and may be more favorable in a population-based sample of patients with high a comorbidity burden (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥4).

Background Sepsis is associated with an elevated risk of late cardiovascular events among hospital survivors. Methods and Results We included OptumLabs Data Warehouse patients from 2009 to 2019 who survived a medical/nonsurgical hospitalization lasting at least 2 nights. The association between sepsis during hospitalization, based on explicit and implicit discharge International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision ( ICD‐9 )/ Tenth Revision ( ICD‐10 ) diagnosis codes, with subsequent death and rehospitalization was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and multivariable Cox proportional‐hazards models. The study population included 2 258 464 survivors of nonsurgical hospitalization (5 396 051 total patient‐years of follow‐up). A total of 808 673 (35.8%) patients had a sepsis hospitalization, including implicit sepsis only in 448 644, explicit sepsis only in 124 841, and both in 235 188. Patients with sepsis during hospitalization had an elevated risk of all‐cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.25–1.28]; P <0.001), all‐cause rehospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.37–1.39]; P <0.001), and cardiovascular hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.41–1.44]; P <0.001), especially heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.49–1.53]). Patients with implicit sepsis had higher risk than those with explicit sepsis. A sensitivity analysis using the first hospitalization yielded concordant results for cardiovascular hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.78 [95% CI, 1.76–1.78]; P <0.001), as did a propensity‐weighted analysis (adjusted HR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.50–1.54]; P <0.001). Conclusions Survivors of sepsis hospitalization are at elevated risk of early and late post‐discharge death as well as cardiovascular and non‐cardiovascular rehospitalization. This hazard spans the spectrum of cardiovascular events and may suggest that sepsis is an important cardiovascular risk factor.

Abstract Objective To emulate the GRADE (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study) trial using real world data before its publication. GRADE directly compared second line glucose lowering drugs for their ability to lower glycated hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c ). Design Observational study. Setting OptumLabs® Data Warehouse (OLDW), a nationwide claims database in the US, 25 January 2010 to 30 June 2019. Participants Adults with type 2 diabetes and HbA 1c 6.8-8.5% while using metformin monotherapy, identified according to the GRADE trial specifications, who also used glimepiride, liraglutide, sitagliptin, or insulin glargine. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was time to HbA 1c ≥7.0%. Secondary outcomes were time to HbA 1c >7.5%, incident microvascular complications, incident macrovascular complications, adverse events, all cause hospital admissions, and all cause mortality. Propensity scores were estimated using the gradient boosting machine method, and inverse propensity score weighting was used to emulate randomization of the treatment groups, which were then compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results 8252 people were identified (19.7% of adults starting the study drugs in OLDW) who met eligibility criteria for the GRADE trial (glimepiride arm=4318, liraglutide arm=690, sitagliptin arm=2993, glargine arm=251). The glargine arm was excluded from analyses owing to small sample size. Median times to HbA 1c ≥7.0% were 442 days (95% confidence interval 394 to 480 days) for glimepiride, 764 (741 to not calculable) days for liraglutide, and 427 (380 to 483) days for sitagliptin. Liraglutide was associated with lower risk of reaching HbA 1c ≥7.0% compared with glimepiride (hazard ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.75) and sitagliptin (0.55, 0.41 to 0.73). Results were consistent for the secondary outcome of time to HbA 1c >7.5%. No significant differences were observed among treatment groups for the remaining secondary outcomes. Conclusions In this emulation of the GRADE trial, liraglutide was statistically significantly more effective at maintaining glycemic control than glimepiride or sitagliptin when added to metformin monotherapy. Generating timely evidence on medical treatments using real world data as a complement to prospective trials is of value.

Background This study aimed to compare percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) with non‐vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants among patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results Using a US administrative database, 562 850 patients with atrial fibrillation were identified, among whom 8397 were treated with LAAO and 554 453 were treated with non‐vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants between March 13, 2015 and December 31, 2018. Propensity score overlap weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was a composite end point of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all‐cause mortality. The mean age was 76.4±7.6 years; 280 097 (49.8%) were female. Mean follow‐up was 1.5±1.0 years. LAAO was associated with no significant difference in the risk of the primary composite end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93 [0.84–1.03]), or the secondary outcomes including ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (HR, 1.07 [0.81–1.41]), and intracranial bleeding (HR, 1.08 [0.72–1.61]). LAAO was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.22 [1.05–1.42], P =0.01) and a lower risk of mortality (HR, 0.73 [0.64–0.84], P <0.001). The lower risk of mortality associated with LAAO was most pronounced in patients with a prior history of intracranial bleeding. Conclusions In comparison to non‐vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, LAAO was associated with no significant difference in the risk of the composite outcome and a lower risk of mortality, which suggests LAAO might be a reasonable option in select patients with atrial fibrillation. The observation of higher bleeding risk associated with LAAO highlights the need to optimize postprocedural antithrombotic regimens as well as systematic efforts to assess and address bleeding predispositions.

6589 Background: Real-world utilization and comparative effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and warfarin for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment remains largely unexplored. Methods: De-identified administrative claims data (OptumLabs - Data Warehouse) for adult active cancer patients with acute VTE (1/1/2012-9/30/2019) were assessed for utilization patterns, recurrent VTE, and major bleeding differences between DOACs, LMWH, and warfarin. Patients were followed up till the end of treatment. Patients who crossed over to other anti-coagulants within the follow up period were excluded. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess predictors of anticoagulant administration. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to evaluate the differences in time to medication discontinuation among the three groups. Propensity score (PS) and inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to balance baseline differences between groups. Standardized difference (SD) was used to assess the balance of covariates after weighting and SD < 10% was considered acceptable. Weighted Cox proportional hazards regression with a robust variance estimator was then used to assess outcomes in PS weighted groups. Results: A total of 5100 patients met the inclusion criteria; 49.3% filled DOACs (n = 2512), 29.2% LMWH (n = 1488), and 28.6% warfarin (n = 1460). Median treatment duration was around 3.2 months for DOACs and warfarin, and 1.8 months for LWMH ( P-value < 0.01). Multinomial regression analysis showed that younger patients were more likely to be prescribed LMWH (OR 0.97 95% CI: 0.97-0.98) as compared to DOACs. Patients with lung (OR 2.07 95% CI: 1.12-3.65; OR 1.87 95% CI: 1.04-3.37), urological (OR: 1.94 95% CI:1.08-3.49; OR: 2.04 95% CI: 1.12-3.73), gynecological (OR 4.25, 95% CI: 2.31-7.82; OR 2.31 95% CI: 1.22-4.39) and colorectal cancer (OR 2.26 95% CI: 1.20-4.32; OR 2.51; 95% CI: 1.32-4.79) were more likely to be prescribed LMWH or warfarin respectively, compared to DOACs. VTE recurrences were more frequent for patients receiving LMWH (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.14-1.90) or warfarin (HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.13-1.87) compared to DOACs. LMWH, but not warfarin, was associated with greater major bleeding rates compared to DOACs (HR: 2.27; 95% CI: 1.62-3.20). All-cause mortality rates were also significantly higher for patients receiving LMWH, but not warfarin compared to DOACs (HR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.15-2.25). Conclusions: Patients with cancer associated VTE remain on anti-coagulation for a remarkably short duration in real-world clinical practice. DOACs and warfarin may offer better compliance than LMWH. Patients receiving DOACs have a lower risk of VTE recurrence, less major bleeding, and improved mortality. Warfarin may still be considered for patients with contraindications to DOACs and non-compliant to LMWH.

Background EAST‐AFNET 4 (Early Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention Trial) demonstrated clinical benefit of early rhythm‐control therapy (ERC) in patients with new‐onset atrial fibrillation (AF) and concomitant cardiovascular conditions compared with current guideline‐based practice. This study aimed to evaluate the generalizability of EAST‐AFNET 4 in routine practice. Methods and Results Using a US administrative database, we identified 109 739 patients with newly diagnosed AF during the enrollment period of EAST‐AFNET 4. Patients were classified as either receiving ERC, using AF ablation or antiarrhythmic drug therapy, within the first year after AF diagnosis (n=27 106) or not receiving ERC (control group, n=82 633). After propensity score overlap weighting, Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare groups for the primary composite outcome of all‐cause mortality, stroke, or hospitalization with the diagnoses heart failure or myocardial infarction. Most patients (79 948 of 109 739; 72.9%) met the inclusion criteria for EAST‐AFNET 4. ERC was associated with a reduced risk for the primary composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75–0.97 [ P =0.02]) with largely consistent results between eligible (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76–1.04 [ P =0.14]) or ineligible (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60–0.98 [ P =0.04]) patients for EAST‐AFNET 4 trial inclusion. ERC was associated with lower risk of stroke in the overall cohort and in trial‐eligible patients. Conclusions This analysis replicates the clinical benefit of ERC seen in EAST‐AFNET 4. The results support adoption of ERC as part of the management of recently diagnosed AF in the United States.