Updated core competencies in pharmacoepidemiology to inform contemporary curricula and training for academia, government, and industry

PURPOSE

The first paper to specify the core content of pharmacoepidemiology as a profession was published by an ISPE (International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology) workgroup in 2012 (Jones JK et al. PDS 2012; 21[7]:677-689). Due to the broader and evolving scope of pharmacoepidemiology, ISPE considers it important to proactively identify, update and expand the list of core competencies to inform curricula of education programs; thus, better positioning pharmacoepidemiologists across academic, government (including regulatory), and industry positions. The aim of this project was to update the list of core competencies in pharmacoepidemiology.

METHODS

To ensure applicability of findings to multiple areas, a working group was established consisting of ISPE members with positions in academia, industry, government, and other settings. All competencies outlined by Jones et al. were extracted from the initial manuscript and presented to the working group for review. Expert-based judgments were collated and used to identify consensus. It was noted that some competencies could contribute to multiple groups and could be directly or indirectly related to a group.

RESULTS

Five core domains were proposed: (1) Epidemiology, (2) Clinical Pharmacology, (3) Regulatory Science, (4) Statistics and data science, and (5) Communication and other professional skills. In total, 55 individual competencies were proposed, of which 25 were new competencies. No competencies from the original work were dropped but aggregation or amendments were made where considered necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

While many core competencies in pharmacoepidemiology have remained the same over the past 10 years, there have also been several updates to reflect new and emerging concepts in the field.

Tactical Considerations for Designing Real-World Studies: Fit-for-Purpose Designs That Bridge Research and Practice

Real-world evidence (RWE) is being used to provide information on diverse groups of patients who may be highly impacted by disease but are not typically studied in traditional randomized clinical trials (RCT) and to obtain insights from everyday care settings and real-world adherence to inform clinical practice. RWE is derived from so-called real-world data (RWD), ie, information generated by clinicians in the course of everyday patient care, and is sometimes coupled with systematic input from patients in the form of patient-reported outcomes or from wearable biosensors. Studies using RWD are conducted to evaluate how well medical interventions, services, and diagnostics perform under conditions of real-world use, and may include long-term follow-up. Here, we describe the main types of studies used to generate RWE and offer pointers for clinicians interested in study design and execution. Our tactical guidance addresses (1) opportunistic study designs, (2) considerations about representativeness of study participants, (3) expectations for transparency about data provenance, handling and quality assessments, and (4) considerations for strengthening studies using record linkage and/or randomization in pragmatic clinical trials. We also discuss likely sources of bias and suggest mitigation strategies. We see a future where clinical records - patient-generated data and other RWD - are brought together and harnessed by robust study design with efficient data capture and strong data curation. Traditional RCT will remain the mainstay of drug development, but RWE will play a growing role in clinical, regulatory, and payer decision-making. The most meaningful RWE will come from collaboration with astute clinicians with deep practice experience and questioning minds working closely with patients and researchers experienced in the development of RWE.

Evaluation of reporting quality of cohort studies using real-world data based on RECORD: systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) have been paid more and more attention in recent years. We aimed to evaluate the reporting quality of cohort studies using real-world data (RWD) published between 2013 and 2021 and analyze the possible factors.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search in Medline and Embase through the OVID interface for cohort studies published from 2013 to 2021 on April 29, 2022. Studies aimed at comparing the effectiveness or safety of exposure factors in the real-world setting were included. The evaluation was based on the REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data (RECORD) statement. Agreement for inclusion and evaluation was calculated using Cohen's kappa. Pearson chi-square test or Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to analyze the possible factors, including the release of RECORD, journal IFs, and article citations. Bonferroni's correction was conducted for multiple comparisons. Interrupted time series analysis was performed to display the changes in report quality over time.

RESULTS

187 articles were finally included. The mean ± SD of the percentage of adequately reported items in the 187 articles was 44.7 ± 14.3 with a range of 11.1-87%. Of 23 items, the adequate reporting rate of 10 items reached 50%, and the reporting rate of some vital items was inadequate. After Bonferroni's correction, the reporting of only one item significantly improved after the release of RECORD and there was no significant improvement in the overall report quality. For interrupted time series analysis, there were no significant changes in the slope (p = 0.42) and level (p = 0.12) of adequate reporting rate. The journal IFs and citations were respectively related to 2 areas and the former significantly higher in high-reporting quality articles.

CONCLUSION

The endorsement of the RECORD cheklist was generally inadequate in cohort studies using RWD and has not improved in recent years. We encourage researchers to endorse relevant guidelines when utilizing RWD for research.

HARmonized Protocol Template to Enhance Reproducibility of hypothesis evaluating real-world evidence studies on treatment effects: A good practices report of a joint ISPE/ISPOR task force

PROBLEM

Ambiguity in communication of key study parameters limits the utility of real-world evidence (RWE) studies in healthcare decision-making. Clear communication about data provenance, design, analysis, and implementation is needed. This would facilitate reproducibility, replication in independent data, and assessment of potential sources of bias.

WHAT WE DID

The International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) and ISPOR-The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) convened a joint task force, including representation from key international stakeholders, to create a harmonized protocol template for RWE studies that evaluate a treatment effect and are intended to inform decision-making. The template builds on existing efforts to improve transparency and incorporates recent insights regarding the level of detail needed to enable RWE study reproducibility. The overarching principle was to reach for sufficient clarity regarding data, design, analysis, and implementation to achieve 3 main goals. One, to help investigators thoroughly consider, then document their choices and rationale for key study parameters that define the causal question (e.g., target estimand), two, to facilitate decision-making by enabling reviewers to readily assess potential for biases related to these choices, and three, to facilitate reproducibility.

STRATEGIES TO DISSEMINATE AND FACILITATE USE

Recognizing that the impact of this harmonized template relies on uptake, we have outlined a plan to introduce and pilot the template with key international stakeholders over the next 2 years.

CONCLUSION

The HARmonized Protocol Template to Enhance Reproducibility (HARPER) helps to create a shared understanding of intended scientific decisions through a common text, tabular and visual structure. The template provides a set of core recommendations for clear and reproducible RWE study protocols and is intended to be used as a backbone throughout the research process from developing a valid study protocol, to registration, through implementation and reporting on those implementation decisions.

Data linkage of two national databases: Lessons learned from linking the Dutch Arthroplasty Register with the Dutch Foundation for Pharmaceutical Statistics

BACKGROUND

To provide guidance on data linkage in case of non-unique identifiers, we present a case study linking the Dutch Foundation for Pharmaceutical Statistics and Dutch Arthroplasty Register to investigate opioid prescriptions before/after arthroplasty.

METHODS

Deterministic data linkage was used. Records were linked on: sex, birthyear, postcode, surgery date, or thromboprophylaxis initiation as a proxy for the surgery date. Different postcodes were used, depending on availability: patient postcode (available from 2013 onwards), hospital postcode with codes for physicians/hospitals, and hospital postcode with catchment area. Linkage was assessed in several groups: linked arthroplasties, linked on patient postcode, linked on patient postcode, and low-molecular-weight heparin(LWMH). Linkage quality was assessed by checking prescriptions after death, antibiotics after revision for infection, and presence of multiple prostheses. Representativeness was assessed by comparing the patient-postcode-LMWH group with the remaining arthroplasties. External validation was performed by comparing our opioid prescription rates with those derived from datasets from Statistics Netherlands.

RESULTS

We linked 317,899 arthroplasties on patient postcode/hospital postcode(48%). Linkage on the hospital postcode appeared insufficient. Linkage uncertainty ranged from roughly 30% in all arthroplasties to 10-21% in the patient-postcode-LMWH-group. This subset resulted in 166.357(42%) linked arthroplasties after 2013 with somewhat younger age, fewer females, and more often osteoarthritis than other indications compared to the other arthroplasties. External validation showed similar increases in opioid prescription rates.

CONCLUSIONS

After identifier selection, checking data availability and internal validity, assessing representativeness, and externally validating our results we found sufficient linkage quality in the patient-postcode-LMWH-group, which consisted of around 42% of the arthroplasties performed after 2013.

Noninterventional studies in the COVID-19 era: methodological considerations for study design and analysis

The global COVID-19 pandemic has generated enormous morbidity and mortality, as well as large health system disruptions including changes in use of prescription medications, outpatient encounters, emergency department admissions, and hospitalizations. These pandemic-related disruptions are reflected in real-world data derived from electronic medical records, administrative claims, disease or medication registries, and mobile devices. We discuss how pandemic-related disruptions in healthcare utilization may impact the conduct of noninterventional studies designed to characterize the utilization and estimate the effects of medical interventions on health-related outcomes. Using hypothetical studies, we highlight consequences that the pandemic may have on study design elements including participant selection and ascertainment of exposures, outcomes, and covariates. We discuss the implications of these pandemic-related disruptions on possible threats to external validity (participant selection) and internal validity (for example, confounding, selection bias, missing data bias). These concerns may be amplified in populations disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, such as racial/ethnic minorities, rural residents, or people experiencing poverty. We propose a general framework for researchers to carefully consider during the design and analysis of noninterventional studies that use real-world data from the COVID-19 era.

Assessing the impact of privacy-preserving record linkage on record overlap and patient demographic and clinical characteristics in PCORnet®, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network

OBJECTIVE

This article describes the implementation of a privacy-preserving record linkage (PPRL) solution across PCORnet®, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Using a PPRL solution from Datavant, we quantified the degree of patient overlap across the network and report a de-duplicated analysis of the demographic and clinical characteristics of the PCORnet population.

RESULTS

There were ∼170M patient records across the responding Network Partners, with ∼138M (81%) of those corresponding to a unique patient. 82.1% of patients were found in a single partner and 14.7% were in 2. The percentage overlap between Partners ranged between 0% and 80% with a median of 0%. Linking patients' electronic health records with claims increased disease prevalence in every clinical characteristic, ranging between 63% and 173%.

DISCUSSION

The overlap between Partners was variable and depended on timeframe. However, patient data linkage changed the prevalence profile of the PCORnet patient population.

CONCLUSIONS

This project was one of the largest linkage efforts of its kind and demonstrates the potential value of record linkage. Linkage between Partners may be most useful in cases where there is geographic proximity between Partners, an expectation that potential linkage Partners will be able to fill gaps in data, or a longer study timeframe.

HARmonized Protocol Template to Enhance Reproducibility of Hypothesis Evaluating Real-World Evidence Studies on Treatment Effects: A Good Practices Report of a Joint ISPE/ISPOR Task Force

OBJECTIVES

Ambiguity in communication of key study parameters limits the utility of real-world evidence (RWE) studies in healthcare decision-making. Clear communication about data provenance, design, analysis, and implementation is needed. This would facilitate reproducibility, replication in independent data, and assessment of potential sources of bias.

METHODS

The International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) and ISPOR-The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) convened a joint task force, including representation from key international stakeholders, to create a harmonized protocol template for RWE studies that evaluate a treatment effect and are intended to inform decision-making. The template builds on existing efforts to improve transparency and incorporates recent insights regarding the level of detail needed to enable RWE study reproducibility. The over-arching principle was to reach for sufficient clarity regarding data, design, analysis, and implementation to achieve 3 main goals. One, to help investigators thoroughly consider, then document their choices and rationale for key study parameters that define the causal question (e.g., target estimand), two, to facilitate decision-making by enabling reviewers to readily assess potential for biases related to these choices, and three, to facilitate reproducibility.

STRATEGIES TO DISSEMINATE AND FACILITATE USE

Recognizing that the impact of this harmonized template relies on uptake, we have outlined a plan to introduce and pilot the template with key international stakeholders over the next 2 years.

CONCLUSION

The HARmonized Protocol Template to Enhance Reproducibility (HARPER) helps to create a shared understanding of intended scientific decisions through a common text, tabular and visual structure. The template provides a set of core recommendations for clear and reproducible RWE study protocols and is intended to be used as a backbone throughout the research process from developing a valid study protocol, to registration, through implementation and reporting on those implementation decisions.

An overview of real-world data sources for oncology and considerations for research

Generating evidence on the use, effectiveness, and safety of new cancer therapies is a priority for researchers, health care providers, payers, and regulators given the rapid pace of change in cancer diagnosis and treatments. The use of real-world data (RWD) is integral to understanding the utilization patterns and outcomes of these new treatments among patients with cancer who are treated in clinical practice and community settings. An initial step in the use of RWD is careful study design to assess the suitability of an RWD source. This pivotal process can be guided by using a conceptual model that encourages predesign conceptualization. The primary types of RWD included are electronic health records, administrative claims data, cancer registries, and specialty data providers and networks. Careful consideration of each data type is necessary because they are collected for a specific purpose, capturing a set of data elements within a certain population for that purpose, and they vary by population coverage and longitudinality. In this review, the authors provide a high-level assessment of the strengths and limitations of each data category to inform data source selection appropriate to the study question. Overall, the development and accessibility of RWD sources for cancer research are rapidly increasing, and the use of these data requires careful consideration of composition and utility to assess important questions in understanding the use and effectiveness of new therapies.

Trends, patterns, and maternal characteristics of opioid prescribing during pregnancy in a large population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Opioid use during pregnancy has been associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes. Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMP) provide a population-based source of prescription data. We linked statewide PDMP and birth certificate data in Tennessee (TN) to determine patterns of prescription opioid and benzodiazepine use during pregnancy.

METHODS

We constructed a cohort of 311,217 live singleton births from 2013 to 2016 with prescription history from 90 days before pregnancy to birth. Descriptive statistics were used to describe opioid prescription patterns during pregnancy overall, by maternal characteristics and by year. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for factors associated with prescription use.

RESULTS

The prevalence of prescription use during pregnancy was 14.1% for opioid analgesics, 1.6% buprenorphine for medication-assisted treatment, and 2.6% for benzodiazepines. The prevalence of opioid analgesic use decreased from 16.6% (2013) to 11.8% (2016) (ptrend< 0.001). About 25% used for > 7 and 9.7% for > 30 days' supply. The most common types were hydrocodone (9.3%), codeine (3.4%), and oxycodone (2.9%). In adjusted models, lower education, lower income, pre-pregnancy obesity and smoking during pregnancy were associated with increased odds of any opioid and opioid analgesic use.

CONCLUSION(S)

Despite the encouraging trend of decreasing use of prescription opioid analgesics, the overall prevalence remained close to 12% with many women using for long durations. Use was associated with lower socioeconomic status, obesity, and prenatal smoking. Findings highlight the need for maternal education and resources, and provider support for implementation of evidence-based care.

Use of Linked Databases for Improved Confounding Control: Considerations for Potential Selection Bias

Pharmacoepidemiologic studies are increasingly conducted within linked databases, often to obtain richer confounder data. However, the potential for selection bias is frequently overlooked when linked data is available only for a subset of patients. We highlight the importance of accounting for potential selection bias by evaluating the association between antipsychotics and type 2 diabetes in youths within a claims database linked to a smaller laboratory database. We used inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTW) to control for confounding. In analyses restricted to the linked cohorts, we applied inverse probability of selection weights (IPSW) to create a population representative of the full cohort. We used pooled logistic regression weighted by IPTW only or IPTW and IPSW to estimate treatment effects. Metabolic conditions were more prevalent in linked cohorts compared with the full cohort. Within the full cohort, the confounding-adjusted hazard ratio was 2.26 (95% CI: 2.07, 2.49) comparing initiation of antipsychotics with initiation of control medications. Within the linked cohorts, a different magnitude of association was obtained without adjustment for selection, whereas applying IPSW resulted in point estimates similar to the full cohort's (e.g., an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.63 became 2.12). Linked database studies may generate biased estimates without proper adjustment for potential selection bias.

Artificial Intelligence-Based Pharmacovigilance in the Setting of Limited Resources

With the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, and the large amount of pharmacovigilance-related data stored in an electronic manner, data-driven automatic methods need to be urgently applied to all aspects of pharmacovigilance to assist healthcare professionals. However, the quantity and quality of data directly affect the performance of AI, and there are particular challenges to implementing AI in limited-resource settings. Analyzing challenges and solutions for AI-based pharmacovigilance in resource-limited settings can improve pharmacovigilance frameworks and capabilities in these settings. In this review, we summarize the challenges into four categories: establishing a database for an AI-based pharmacovigilance system, lack of human resources, weak AI technology and insufficient government support. This study also discusses possible solutions and future perspectives on AI-based pharmacovigilance in resource-limited settings.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions: the experience of applying for national data for linkage and suggestions for improvement

BACKGROUND

We can improve healthcare services by better understanding current provision. One way to understand this is by linking data sets from clinical and national audits, national registries and other National Health Service (NHS) encounter data. However, getting to the point of having linked national data sets is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

We describe our experience of the data application and linkage process for our study 'LAUNCHES QI', and the time, processes and resource requirements involved. To help others planning similar projects, we highlight challenges encountered and advice for applications in the current system as well as suggestions for system improvements.

FINDINGS

The study set up for LAUNCHES QI began in March 2018, and the process through to data acquisition took 2.5 years. Several challenges were encountered, including the amount of information required (often duplicate information in different formats across applications), lack of clarity on processes, resource constraints that limit an audit's capacity to fulfil requests and the unexpected amount of time required from the study team. It is incredibly difficult to estimate the resources needed ahead of time, and yet necessary to do so as early on as funding applications. Early decisions can have a significant impact during latter stages and be hard to change, yet it is difficult to get specific information at the beginning of the process.

CONCLUSIONS

The current system is incredibly complex, arduous and slow, stifling innovation and delaying scientific progress. NHS data can inform and improve health services and we believe there is an ethical responsibility to use it to do so. Streamlining the number of applications required for accessing data for health services research and providing clarity to data controllers could facilitate the maintenance of stringent governance, while accelerating scientific studies and progress, leading to swifter application of findings and improvements in healthcare.

Linking cohort-based data with electronic health records: a proof-of-concept methodological study in Hong Kong

OBJECTIVES

Data linkage of cohort-based data and electronic health records (EHRs) has been practised in many countries, but in Hong Kong there is still a lack of such research. To expand the use of multisource data, we aimed to identify a feasible way of linking two cohorts with EHRs in Hong Kong.

METHODS

Participants in the 'Children of 1997' birth cohort and the Chinese Early Development Instrument (CEDI) cohort were separated into several batches. The Hong Kong Identity Card Numbers (HKIDs) of each batch were then uploaded to the Hong Kong Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System (CDARS) to retrieve EHRs. Within the same batch, each participant has a unique combination of date of birth and sex which can then be used for exact matching, as no HKID will be returned from CDARS. Raw data collected for the two cohorts were checked for the mismatched cases. After the matching, we conducted a simple descriptive analysis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) information collected in the CEDI cohort via the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD Symptoms and Normal Behaviour Scale (SWAN) and EHRs.

RESULTS

In total, 3473 and 910 HKIDs in the birth cohort and CEDI cohort were separated into 44 and 5 batches, respectively, and then submitted to the CDARS, with 100% and 97% being valid HKIDs respectively. The match rates were confirmed to be 100% and 99.75% after checking the cohort data. From our illustration using the ADHD information in the CEDI cohort, 36 (4.47%) individuals had ADHD-Combined score over the clinical cut-off in the SWAN survey, and 68 (8.31%) individuals had ADHD records in EHRs.

CONCLUSIONS

Using date of birth and sex as identifiable variables, we were able to link the cohort data and EHRs with high match rates. This method will assist in the generation of databases for future multidisciplinary research using both cohort data and EHRs.

Incorporating patient generated health data into pharmacoepidemiological research

Epidemiology and pharmacoepidemiology frequently employ Real-World Data (RWD) from healthcare teams to inform research. These data sources usually include signs, symptoms, tests, and treatments, but may lack important information such as the patient's diet or adherence or quality of life. By harnessing digital tools a new fount of evidence, Patient (or Citizen/Person) Generated Health Data (PGHD), is becoming more readily available. This review focusses on the advantages and considerations in using PGHD for pharmacoepidemiological research. New and corroborative types of data can be collected directly from patients using digital devices, both passively and actively. Practical issues such as patient engagement, data linking, validation, and analysis are among important considerations in the use of PGHD. In our ever increasingly patient-centric world, PGHD incorporated into more traditional Real-Word data sources offers innovative opportunities to expand our understanding of the complex factors involved in health and the safety and effectiveness of disease treatments. Pharmacoepidemiologists have a unique role in realizing the potential of PGHD by ensuring that robust methodology, governance, and analytical techniques underpin its use to generate meaningful research results.

The Certainty Framework for Assessing Real-World Data in Studies of Medical Product Safety and Effectiveness

A fundamental question in using real-world data for clinical and regulatory decision making is: How certain must we be that the algorithm used to capture an exposure, outcome, cohort-defining characteristic, or confounder is what we intend it to be? We provide a practical framework to help researchers and regulators assess and classify the fit-for-purposefulness of real-world data by study variable for a range of data sources. The three levels of certainty (optimal, sufficient, and probable) must be considered in the context of each study variable, the specific question being studied, the study design, and the decision at hand.

Real-world evidence: the devil is in the detail

Much has been written about real-world evidence (RWE), a concept that offers an understanding of the effects of healthcare interventions using routine clinical data. The reflection of diverse real-world practices is a double-edged sword that makes RWE attractive but also opens doors to several biases that need to be minimised both in the design and analytical phases of non-experimental studies. Additionally, it is critical to ensure that researchers who conduct these studies possess adequate methodological expertise and ability to accurately implement these methods. Critical design elements to be considered should include a clearly defined research question using a causal inference framework, choice of a fit-for-purpose data source, inclusion of new users of a treatment with comparators that are as similar as possible to that group, accurately classifying person-time and deciding censoring approaches. Having taken measures to minimise bias 'by design', the next step is to implement appropriate analytical techniques (for example propensity scores) to minimise the remnant potential biases. A clear protocol should be provided at the beginning of the study and a report of the results after, including caveats to consider. We also point the readers to readings on some novel analytical methods as well as newer areas of application of RWE. While there is no one-size-fits-all solution to evaluating RWE studies, we have focused our discussion on key methods and issues commonly encountered in comparative observational cohort studies with the hope that readers are better equipped to evaluate non-experimental studies that they encounter in the future. Graphical abstract.