Target trial emulation using cohort studies: estimating the effect of antihypertensive medication initiation on incident dementia.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Erin E Bennett, Chelsea Liu, Emma K Stapp, Kan Z Gianattasio, Scott C Zimmerman, Jingkai Wei, Michael E Griswold, Annette L Fitzpatrick, Rebecca F Gottesman, Lenore J Launer, B Gwen Windham, Deborah A Levine, Alison E Fohner, M Maria Glymour, Melinda C Power
{"title":"Target trial emulation using cohort studies: estimating the effect of antihypertensive medication initiation on incident dementia.","authors":"Erin E Bennett, Chelsea Liu, Emma K Stapp, Kan Z Gianattasio, Scott C Zimmerman, Jingkai Wei, Michael E Griswold, Annette L Fitzpatrick, Rebecca F Gottesman, Lenore J Launer, B Gwen Windham, Deborah A Levine, Alison E Fohner, M Maria Glymour, Melinda C Power","doi":"10.1097/EDE.0000000000001802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Observational studies link high midlife systolic blood pressure to increased dementia risk. However, synthesis of evidence from randomized controlled trials has not definitively demonstrated that antihypertensive medication use reduces dementia risk. Here, we emulate target trials of antihypertensive medication initiation on incident dementia using three cohort studies, with attention to potential violations of necessary assumptions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We emulated trials of antihypertensive medication initiation on incident dementia using data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS), and Health and Retirement Study (HRS). We used data-driven methods to restrict participants to initiators and non-initiators with overlap in propensity scores and positive control outcomes to look for violations of positivity and exchangeability assumptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analyses were limited by the small number of cohort participants who met eligibility criteria. Associations between antihypertensive medication initiation and incident dementia were inconsistent and imprecise (ARIC: HR = 0.30 [0.05, 1.93]; CHS: HR = 0.66 [0.27, 1.64]; HRS: HR = 1.09 [0.75, 1.59]). More stringent propensity score restriction had little effect on findings. Sensitivity analyses using a positive control outcome unexpectedly suggested antihypertensive medication initiation increased risk of coronary heart disease in all three samples.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Positive control outcome analyses suggested substantial residual confounding in effect estimates from our target trials, precluding conclusions about the impact of antihypertensive medication initiation on dementia risk through target trial emulation. Formalized processes for identifying violations of necessary assumptions will strengthen confidence in target trial emulation and avoid inappropriate confidence in emulated trial results.</p>","PeriodicalId":11779,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000001802","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Observational studies link high midlife systolic blood pressure to increased dementia risk. However, synthesis of evidence from randomized controlled trials has not definitively demonstrated that antihypertensive medication use reduces dementia risk. Here, we emulate target trials of antihypertensive medication initiation on incident dementia using three cohort studies, with attention to potential violations of necessary assumptions.

Methods: We emulated trials of antihypertensive medication initiation on incident dementia using data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS), and Health and Retirement Study (HRS). We used data-driven methods to restrict participants to initiators and non-initiators with overlap in propensity scores and positive control outcomes to look for violations of positivity and exchangeability assumptions.

Results: Analyses were limited by the small number of cohort participants who met eligibility criteria. Associations between antihypertensive medication initiation and incident dementia were inconsistent and imprecise (ARIC: HR = 0.30 [0.05, 1.93]; CHS: HR = 0.66 [0.27, 1.64]; HRS: HR = 1.09 [0.75, 1.59]). More stringent propensity score restriction had little effect on findings. Sensitivity analyses using a positive control outcome unexpectedly suggested antihypertensive medication initiation increased risk of coronary heart disease in all three samples.

Conclusions: Positive control outcome analyses suggested substantial residual confounding in effect estimates from our target trials, precluding conclusions about the impact of antihypertensive medication initiation on dementia risk through target trial emulation. Formalized processes for identifying violations of necessary assumptions will strengthen confidence in target trial emulation and avoid inappropriate confidence in emulated trial results.

利用队列研究进行目标试验模拟:估算开始服用降压药对痴呆症的影响。
背景:观察性研究发现,中年收缩压过高与痴呆症风险增加有关。然而,对随机对照试验证据的综合分析并未明确证明使用降压药可降低痴呆风险。在此,我们利用三项队列研究来模拟降压药对痴呆症发病的目标试验,并关注可能违反必要假设的情况:我们利用社区动脉粥样硬化风险研究(ARIC)、心血管健康研究(CHS)和健康与退休研究(HRS)的数据,模拟了抗高血压药物治疗痴呆症的试验。我们采用数据驱动方法,将参与者限定为倾向分数和阳性对照结果重叠的启动者和非启动者,以寻找违反阳性和可交换性假设的情况:由于符合资格标准的队列参与者人数较少,分析受到了限制。开始服用降压药与痴呆症之间的关系不一致,也不精确(ARIC:HR = 0.30 [0.05, 1.93];CHS:HR = 0.66 [0.27, 1.64];HRS:HR = 1.09 [0.75, 1.59])。更严格的倾向得分限制对研究结果影响甚微。使用阳性对照结果进行的敏感性分析意外地表明,在所有三个样本中,开始服用降压药会增加冠心病风险:阳性对照结果分析表明,目标试验的效应估计值中存在大量残余混杂因素,因此无法通过目标试验仿真得出降压药对痴呆症风险影响的结论。识别违反必要假设的正式流程将增强对目标试验仿真的信心,避免对仿真试验结果产生不恰当的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Epidemiology
Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
177
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology publishes original research from all fields of epidemiology. The journal also welcomes review articles and meta-analyses, novel hypotheses, descriptions and applications of new methods, and discussions of research theory or public health policy. We give special consideration to papers from developing countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信