Masking in Active Comparator Designs in Pharmacovigilance: A Retrospective Bias Analysis on the Spontaneous Reporting of Thiazolidinediones and Cardiovascular Events.
William Bai, Antonios Douros, Christopher A Gravel
{"title":"Masking in Active Comparator Designs in Pharmacovigilance: A Retrospective Bias Analysis on the Spontaneous Reporting of Thiazolidinediones and Cardiovascular Events.","authors":"William Bai, Antonios Douros, Christopher A Gravel","doi":"10.1002/pds.70102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Masking is a reporting bias where drug safety signals are muffled by elevated reporting of other medications in spontaneous reporting databases. While the impact of masking is often limited, its effect when using restricted designs, such as active comparators, can be consequential.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the US Food and Drugs Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (1999Q3-2013Q3) to study masking in a real-world example. Rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione with elevated reporting after safety concerns over cardiovascular risks, was the masking candidate. We hypothesized that stimulated reporting masked signals for another thiazolidinedione, pioglitazone. We computed estimates of proportional reporting ratios and information components, using the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network, for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction and pioglitazone-cardiac failure under unrestricted and active comparator designs, with and without the mask, before (1999Q3-2007Q1) and after (2007Q2-2013Q3) safety concerns. Relative change-in-estimates were computed to compare results with and without rosiglitazone.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 1999Q3-2007Q1, relative change-in-estimates of proportional reporting ratio for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.00 in unrestricted design and 0.10 in active comparator, and for pioglitazone-cardiac failure, the change was 0.01 and 0.62, respectively. From 2007Q2-2013Q3, relative change-in-estimates for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.41 in unrestricted design and 18.00 in active comparator; the change for pioglitazone-cardiac failure was 0.04 and 1.03, respectively. Relative changes in estimates of information component mirrored these trends.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Masking can influence signal detection in active comparator designs where external events impact reporting rates in reference sets. Evaluating masking in related contexts is essential for drug safety monitoring and resource allocation for follow-up studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 1","pages":"e70102"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70102","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Masking is a reporting bias where drug safety signals are muffled by elevated reporting of other medications in spontaneous reporting databases. While the impact of masking is often limited, its effect when using restricted designs, such as active comparators, can be consequential.
Methods: We used data from the US Food and Drugs Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (1999Q3-2013Q3) to study masking in a real-world example. Rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione with elevated reporting after safety concerns over cardiovascular risks, was the masking candidate. We hypothesized that stimulated reporting masked signals for another thiazolidinedione, pioglitazone. We computed estimates of proportional reporting ratios and information components, using the Bayesian confidence propagation neural network, for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction and pioglitazone-cardiac failure under unrestricted and active comparator designs, with and without the mask, before (1999Q3-2007Q1) and after (2007Q2-2013Q3) safety concerns. Relative change-in-estimates were computed to compare results with and without rosiglitazone.
Results: From 1999Q3-2007Q1, relative change-in-estimates of proportional reporting ratio for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.00 in unrestricted design and 0.10 in active comparator, and for pioglitazone-cardiac failure, the change was 0.01 and 0.62, respectively. From 2007Q2-2013Q3, relative change-in-estimates for pioglitazone-myocardial infarction was 0.41 in unrestricted design and 18.00 in active comparator; the change for pioglitazone-cardiac failure was 0.04 and 1.03, respectively. Relative changes in estimates of information component mirrored these trends.
Conclusions: Masking can influence signal detection in active comparator designs where external events impact reporting rates in reference sets. Evaluating masking in related contexts is essential for drug safety monitoring and resource allocation for follow-up studies.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report.
Particular areas of interest include:
design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology;
comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world;
methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology;
assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy;
patterns of drug utilization;
relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines;
evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.