Using epidemiological registry data to provide background rates as context for adverse events in a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program

A coordinated approach

Fredrik Nyberg, Johan Askling, Niklas Berglind, Stefan Franzén, Meilien Ho, Marie Holmqvist, Laura Horne, Kathy Lampl, Kaleb D Michaud, Dimitrios A. Pappas, George Reed, Deborah Symmons, Eiichi Tanaka, Trung N. Tran, Suzanne M M Verstappen, Eveline Wesby-van Swaay, Hisashi Yamanaka, Jeffrey D. Greenberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Observational studies can provide context for adverse events observed in clinical trials, especially for infrequent events or long-term risks. We developed methods to improve safety contextualization for a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program through coordinated analyses of multiple registries. Methods: We identified and characterized differences and similarities across five registries (Swedish Rheumatology Quality of Care Register, Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America [CORRONA], Norfolk Arthritis Register, Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis, and the new CORRONA International), harmonized outcome definitions, and investigated whether restricted subcohorts improved comparability with trial populations. To address confounding, we identified risk predictors for outcomes of interest (mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, and malignancy). We used patient-level analyses at each registry and central analysis of standardized group-level data. Results: Despite data differences, the coordinated approach enabled consistent variable definitions for key baseline characteristics and outcomes. Selection of restricted subcohorts (e.g., using active joint count criteria) improved baseline comparability with trial patients for some rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures, but less for other characteristics (e.g., age and comorbidity); however, such selection decreased sample size considerably. For most outcomes, age was the most important risk predictor, emphasizing the importance of age/sex standardization to address confounding. The prospective approach enabled use of recent relevant data; the distributed analysis safeguarded confidentiality of registry data. Conclusions: Compared with reliance on published data alone, a forward-looking coordinated approach across multiple observational data sources can improve comparability and consistency and better support sensitivity analyses and data interpretation, in contextualizing safety data from clinical trials. This approach may have utility to support safety assessments across diverse diseases and drug development programs and satisfy future regulatory requirements.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1121-1132
Number of pages12
JournalPharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
Volume24
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2015

Fingerprint

Rheumatology
Registries
Rheumatoid Arthritis
North America
Safety
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Cardiovascular Infections
Research Personnel
Clinical Trials
Quality of Health Care
Information Storage and Retrieval
Confidentiality
Sample Size
Arthritis
Observational Studies
Comorbidity
Cardiovascular Diseases
Joints
Mortality
Population

Keywords

  • Adverse events
  • Clinical trials
  • Methodology
  • Observational data
  • Pharmacoepidemiology
  • Registries
  • Rheumatoid arthritis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Epidemiology

Cite this

Using epidemiological registry data to provide background rates as context for adverse events in a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program : A coordinated approach. / Nyberg, Fredrik; Askling, Johan; Berglind, Niklas; Franzén, Stefan; Ho, Meilien; Holmqvist, Marie; Horne, Laura; Lampl, Kathy; Michaud, Kaleb D; Pappas, Dimitrios A.; Reed, George; Symmons, Deborah; Tanaka, Eiichi; Tran, Trung N.; Verstappen, Suzanne M M; Wesby-van Swaay, Eveline; Yamanaka, Hisashi; Greenberg, Jeffrey D.

In: Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, Vol. 24, No. 11, 01.11.2015, p. 1121-1132.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nyberg, F, Askling, J, Berglind, N, Franzén, S, Ho, M, Holmqvist, M, Horne, L, Lampl, K, Michaud, KD, Pappas, DA, Reed, G, Symmons, D, Tanaka, E, Tran, TN, Verstappen, SMM, Wesby-van Swaay, E, Yamanaka, H & Greenberg, JD 2015, 'Using epidemiological registry data to provide background rates as context for adverse events in a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program: A coordinated approach', Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 1121-1132. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3854
Nyberg, Fredrik ; Askling, Johan ; Berglind, Niklas ; Franzén, Stefan ; Ho, Meilien ; Holmqvist, Marie ; Horne, Laura ; Lampl, Kathy ; Michaud, Kaleb D ; Pappas, Dimitrios A. ; Reed, George ; Symmons, Deborah ; Tanaka, Eiichi ; Tran, Trung N. ; Verstappen, Suzanne M M ; Wesby-van Swaay, Eveline ; Yamanaka, Hisashi ; Greenberg, Jeffrey D. / Using epidemiological registry data to provide background rates as context for adverse events in a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program : A coordinated approach. In: Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. 2015 ; Vol. 24, No. 11. pp. 1121-1132.
@article{73f697c233ac4a7393816be6e60237aa,
title = "Using epidemiological registry data to provide background rates as context for adverse events in a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program: A coordinated approach",
abstract = "Purpose: Observational studies can provide context for adverse events observed in clinical trials, especially for infrequent events or long-term risks. We developed methods to improve safety contextualization for a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program through coordinated analyses of multiple registries. Methods: We identified and characterized differences and similarities across five registries (Swedish Rheumatology Quality of Care Register, Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America [CORRONA], Norfolk Arthritis Register, Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis, and the new CORRONA International), harmonized outcome definitions, and investigated whether restricted subcohorts improved comparability with trial populations. To address confounding, we identified risk predictors for outcomes of interest (mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, and malignancy). We used patient-level analyses at each registry and central analysis of standardized group-level data. Results: Despite data differences, the coordinated approach enabled consistent variable definitions for key baseline characteristics and outcomes. Selection of restricted subcohorts (e.g., using active joint count criteria) improved baseline comparability with trial patients for some rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures, but less for other characteristics (e.g., age and comorbidity); however, such selection decreased sample size considerably. For most outcomes, age was the most important risk predictor, emphasizing the importance of age/sex standardization to address confounding. The prospective approach enabled use of recent relevant data; the distributed analysis safeguarded confidentiality of registry data. Conclusions: Compared with reliance on published data alone, a forward-looking coordinated approach across multiple observational data sources can improve comparability and consistency and better support sensitivity analyses and data interpretation, in contextualizing safety data from clinical trials. This approach may have utility to support safety assessments across diverse diseases and drug development programs and satisfy future regulatory requirements.",
keywords = "Adverse events, Clinical trials, Methodology, Observational data, Pharmacoepidemiology, Registries, Rheumatoid arthritis",
author = "Fredrik Nyberg and Johan Askling and Niklas Berglind and Stefan Franz{\'e}n and Meilien Ho and Marie Holmqvist and Laura Horne and Kathy Lampl and Michaud, {Kaleb D} and Pappas, {Dimitrios A.} and George Reed and Deborah Symmons and Eiichi Tanaka and Tran, {Trung N.} and Verstappen, {Suzanne M M} and {Wesby-van Swaay}, Eveline and Hisashi Yamanaka and Greenberg, {Jeffrey D.}",
year = "2015",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/pds.3854",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "1121--1132",
journal = "Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety",
issn = "1053-8569",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Using epidemiological registry data to provide background rates as context for adverse events in a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program

T2 - A coordinated approach

AU - Nyberg, Fredrik

AU - Askling, Johan

AU - Berglind, Niklas

AU - Franzén, Stefan

AU - Ho, Meilien

AU - Holmqvist, Marie

AU - Horne, Laura

AU - Lampl, Kathy

AU - Michaud, Kaleb D

AU - Pappas, Dimitrios A.

AU - Reed, George

AU - Symmons, Deborah

AU - Tanaka, Eiichi

AU - Tran, Trung N.

AU - Verstappen, Suzanne M M

AU - Wesby-van Swaay, Eveline

AU - Yamanaka, Hisashi

AU - Greenberg, Jeffrey D.

PY - 2015/11/1

Y1 - 2015/11/1

N2 - Purpose: Observational studies can provide context for adverse events observed in clinical trials, especially for infrequent events or long-term risks. We developed methods to improve safety contextualization for a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program through coordinated analyses of multiple registries. Methods: We identified and characterized differences and similarities across five registries (Swedish Rheumatology Quality of Care Register, Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America [CORRONA], Norfolk Arthritis Register, Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis, and the new CORRONA International), harmonized outcome definitions, and investigated whether restricted subcohorts improved comparability with trial populations. To address confounding, we identified risk predictors for outcomes of interest (mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, and malignancy). We used patient-level analyses at each registry and central analysis of standardized group-level data. Results: Despite data differences, the coordinated approach enabled consistent variable definitions for key baseline characteristics and outcomes. Selection of restricted subcohorts (e.g., using active joint count criteria) improved baseline comparability with trial patients for some rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures, but less for other characteristics (e.g., age and comorbidity); however, such selection decreased sample size considerably. For most outcomes, age was the most important risk predictor, emphasizing the importance of age/sex standardization to address confounding. The prospective approach enabled use of recent relevant data; the distributed analysis safeguarded confidentiality of registry data. Conclusions: Compared with reliance on published data alone, a forward-looking coordinated approach across multiple observational data sources can improve comparability and consistency and better support sensitivity analyses and data interpretation, in contextualizing safety data from clinical trials. This approach may have utility to support safety assessments across diverse diseases and drug development programs and satisfy future regulatory requirements.

AB - Purpose: Observational studies can provide context for adverse events observed in clinical trials, especially for infrequent events or long-term risks. We developed methods to improve safety contextualization for a rheumatoid arthritis drug development program through coordinated analyses of multiple registries. Methods: We identified and characterized differences and similarities across five registries (Swedish Rheumatology Quality of Care Register, Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America [CORRONA], Norfolk Arthritis Register, Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis, and the new CORRONA International), harmonized outcome definitions, and investigated whether restricted subcohorts improved comparability with trial populations. To address confounding, we identified risk predictors for outcomes of interest (mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, and malignancy). We used patient-level analyses at each registry and central analysis of standardized group-level data. Results: Despite data differences, the coordinated approach enabled consistent variable definitions for key baseline characteristics and outcomes. Selection of restricted subcohorts (e.g., using active joint count criteria) improved baseline comparability with trial patients for some rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures, but less for other characteristics (e.g., age and comorbidity); however, such selection decreased sample size considerably. For most outcomes, age was the most important risk predictor, emphasizing the importance of age/sex standardization to address confounding. The prospective approach enabled use of recent relevant data; the distributed analysis safeguarded confidentiality of registry data. Conclusions: Compared with reliance on published data alone, a forward-looking coordinated approach across multiple observational data sources can improve comparability and consistency and better support sensitivity analyses and data interpretation, in contextualizing safety data from clinical trials. This approach may have utility to support safety assessments across diverse diseases and drug development programs and satisfy future regulatory requirements.

KW - Adverse events

KW - Clinical trials

KW - Methodology

KW - Observational data

KW - Pharmacoepidemiology

KW - Registries

KW - Rheumatoid arthritis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959499034&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84959499034&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/pds.3854

DO - 10.1002/pds.3854

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 1121

EP - 1132

JO - Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

JF - Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

SN - 1053-8569

IS - 11

ER -