Empirical assessment of case‐based methods for identification of drugs associated with acute liver injury in the French National Healthcare System database (SNDS). Issue 3 (19th November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Thurin, Nicolas H.; Lassalle, Régis; Schuemie, Martijn; Pénichon, Marine; Gagne, Joshua J.; Rassen, Jeremy A.; Benichou, Jacques; Weill, Alain; Blin, Patrick; Moore, Nicholas; Droz‐Perroteau, Cécile
• Is Part Of: Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety. Volume 30:Issue 3(2021)
• Page Start: 320
• Page End: 333
• Publication Date: 2020-11-19
• Subjects: acute liver injury -- calibration -- case‐control -- case‐population -- claims database -- pharmacoepidemiology -- self‐controlled case series -- SNDS; Pharmacoepidemiology -- Periodicals; Chemotherapy -- Periodicals; Epidemiology -- Periodicals; 615.705
• DOI: 10.1002/pds.5161
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1053-8569

Abstract

Abstract: Purposes: Drug induced acute liver injury (ALI) is a frequent cause of liver failure. Case‐based designs were empirically assessed and calibrated in the French National claims database (SNDS), aiming to identify the optimum design for drug safety alert generation associated with ALI. Methods: All cases of ALI were extracted from SNDS (2009‐2014) using specific and sensitive definitions. Positive and negative drug controls were used to compare 196 self‐controlled case series (SCCS), case‐control (CC), and case‐population (CP) design variants, using area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), mean square error (MSE) and coverage probability. Parameters that had major impacts on results were identified through logistic regression. Results: Using a specific ALI definition, AUCs ranged from 0.78 to 0.94, 0.64 to 0.92 and 0.48 to 0.85, for SCCS, CC and CP, respectively. MSE ranged from 0.12 to 0.40, 0.22 to 0.39 and 1.03 to 5.29, respectively. Variants adjusting for multiple drug use had higher coverage probabilities. Univariate regressions showed that high AUCs were achieved with SCCS using exposed time as the risk window. The top SCCS variant yielded an AUC = 0.93 and MSE = 0.22 and coverage = 86%, with 1/7 negative and 13/18 positive controls presenting significant estimates. Conclusions: SCCS adjusting for multiple drugs and using exposed time as the risk window performed best in generating ALI‐related drug safety alert and providing estimates of the magnitude of the risk. This approach may be useful for ad‐hoc pharmacoepidemiology studies to support regulatory actions.