Propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting to address confounding by indication in comparative effectiveness research of oral anticoagulants

被引：127

作者：

Allan, Victoria ^{[1
]}

Ramagopalan, Sreeram, V ^{[1
]}

Mardekian, Jack ^{[2
]}

Jenkins, Aaron ^{[3
]}

Li, Xiaoyan ^{[4
]}

Pan, Xianying ^{[5
]}

Luo, Xuemei ^{[6
]}

机构：

[1] Bristol Myers Squibb, Ctr Observat Res & Data Sci, Uxbridge, Middx, England

[2] Pfizer Inc, Stat Global Biometr & Data Management, New York, NY USA

[3] Pfizer Ltd, Patient Hlth & Impact, Outcomes & Evidence, Tadworth, England

[4] Bristol Myers Squibb, Worldwide Hlth Econ & Outcomes Res, Lawrenceville, NJ USA

[5] Bristol Myers Squibb, Pharmacoepidemiol, Lawrenceville, NJ USA

[6] Pfizer Inc, Patient Hlth & Impact, Outcomes & Evidence, Groton, CT 06340 USA

来源：

JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH | 2020年 / 9卷 / 09期

关键词：

atrial fibrillation; comparative effectiveness research; confounding by indication; inverse probability of treatment weighting; oral anticoagulants; propensity score matching; NONVALVULAR ATRIAL-FIBRILLATION; REAL-WORLD DATA; CAUSAL INFERENCE; STROKE PREVENTION; TASK-FORCE; WARFARIN; SAFETY; METAANALYSIS; DABIGATRAN; TUTORIAL;

D O I：

10.2217/cer-2020-0013

中图分类号：

R19 [保健组织与事业（卫生事业管理）];

学科分类号：

摘要：

After decades of warfarin being the only oral anticoagulant (OAC) widely available for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, four direct OACs (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) were approved after demonstrating noninferior efficacy and safety versus warfarin in randomized controlled trials. Comparative effectiveness research of OACs based on real-world data provides complementary information to randomized controlled trials. Propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting are increasingly popular methods used to address confounding by indication potentially arising in comparative effectiveness research due to a lack of randomization in treatment assignment. This review describes the fundamentals of propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting, appraises differences between them and presents applied examples to elevate understanding of these methods within the atrial fibrillation field.

引用

页码：603 / 614

页数：12

共 47 条

[1] Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: A systematic review and suggestions for improvement [J].

Austin, Peter C. .

JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2007, 134 (05) :1128-U7

[2] Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies [J].

Austin, Peter C. ;

Stuart, Elizabeth A. .

STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2015, 34 (28) :3661-3679

[3] A comparison of 12 algorithms for matching on the propensity score [J].

Austin, Peter C. .

STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2014, 33 (06) :1057-1069

[4] A Tutorial and Case Study in Propensity Score Analysis: An Application to Estimating the Effect of In-Hospital Smoking Cessation Counseling on Mortality [J].

Austin, Peter C. .

MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2011, 46 (01) :119-151

[5] Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies [J].

Austin, Peter C. .

PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2011, 10 (02) :150-161

[6] Statistical Criteria for Selecting the Optimal Number of Untreated Subjects Matched to Each Treated Subject When Using Many-to-One Matching on the Propensity Score [J].

Austin, Peter C. .

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 172 (09) :1092-1097

[7] Good practices for real-world data studies of treatment and/or comparative effectiveness: Recommendations from the joint ISPOR-ISPE Special Task Force on real-world evidence in health care decision making [J].

Berger, Marc L. ;

Sox, Harold ;

Willke, Richard J. ;

Brixner, Diana L. ;

Eichler, Hans-Georg ;

Goettsch, Wim ;

Madigan, David ;

Makady, Amr ;

Schneeweiss, Sebastian ;

Tarricone, Rosanna ;

Wang, Shirley V. ;

Watkins, John ;

Daniel Mullins, C. .

PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2017, 26 (09) :1033-1039

[8] Three handy tips and a practical guide to improve your propensity score models [J].

Bergstra, Sytske Anne ;

Sepriano, Alexandre ;

Ramiro, Sofia ;

Landewe, Robert .

RMD OPEN, 2019, 5 (01)

[9] Are propensity scores really superior to standard multivariable analysis? [J].

Biondi-Zoccai, Giuseppe ;

Romagnoli, Enrico ;

Agostoni, Pierfrancesco ;

Capodanno, Davide ;

Castagno, Davide ;

D'Ascenzo, Fabrizio ;

Sangiorgi, Giuseppe ;

Modena, Maria Grazia .

CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2011, 32 (05) :731-740

[10] Applications of propensity score methods in observational comparative effectiveness and safety research: where have we come and where should we go? [J].

Borah, Bijan J. ;

Moriarty, James P. ;

Crown, William H. ;

Doshi, Jalpa A. .

JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2014, 3 (01) :63-78

← 1 2 3 4 5 →