Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists and Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease Among Type 2 Diabetes Patients: Replication and Reliability Assessment Across a Research Network.

IF 2.4 4区医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1002/pds.70087

Mitchell M Conover, Yasser Albogami, Jill Hardin, Christian G Reich, Anna Ostropolets, Patrick B Ryan

{"title":"Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists and Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease Among Type 2 Diabetes Patients: Replication and Reliability Assessment Across a Research Network.","authors":"Mitchell M Conover, Yasser Albogami, Jill Hardin, Christian G Reich, Anna Ostropolets, Patrick B Ryan","doi":"10.1002/pds.70087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The aim of this study is to use observational methods to evaluate reliability of evidence generated by a study of the effect of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) on chronic lower respiratory disease (CLRD) outcomes among Type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients.Research design and methods: We independently reproduced a study comparing effects of GLP-1RA versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4-i) on CLRD outcomes among patients with T2DM and prior CLRD. We reproduced inputs and outputs using the original study data (national administrative claims) and evaluated the robustness of results in comparison to alternate design/analysis decisions. To evaluate generalizability, we applied an analysis protocol and conducted a meta-analysis across a research network that includes a diverse array of populations and data sources. We also produced additional analyses evaluating individual drugs within the GLP-1RA class and CLRD outcomes.Results: We confirmed alignment of study inputs and outputs and closely reproduced effect estimates and sensitivity analyses. Adjusted effect estimates were robust to empirical calibration. Network meta-analysis confirmed original findings but indicated weaker effects than originally published. Meta-analysis of drugs within the GLP-1RA class against DPP4-i provided evidence that effects vary within the GLP-1RA class, indicating stronger effects for exenatide and weaker effects of dulaglutide.Conclusions: This study supports and establishes the reliability of the original study by (1) producing consistent findings in a range of alternate databases and populations, (2) demonstrating effects for multiple drugs within the GLP-1RA class, and (3) independently confirming the reproducibility of the original study and its findings. This reliability evaluation provides the beginnings of a broader framework for using standardized tools and distributed data networks to systematically interrogate the reliability of findings generated using observational data.","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 1","pages":"e70087"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11730806/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70087","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: The aim of this study is to use observational methods to evaluate reliability of evidence generated by a study of the effect of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) on chronic lower respiratory disease (CLRD) outcomes among Type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients.

Research design and methods: We independently reproduced a study comparing effects of GLP-1RA versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4-i) on CLRD outcomes among patients with T2DM and prior CLRD. We reproduced inputs and outputs using the original study data (national administrative claims) and evaluated the robustness of results in comparison to alternate design/analysis decisions. To evaluate generalizability, we applied an analysis protocol and conducted a meta-analysis across a research network that includes a diverse array of populations and data sources. We also produced additional analyses evaluating individual drugs within the GLP-1RA class and CLRD outcomes.

Results: We confirmed alignment of study inputs and outputs and closely reproduced effect estimates and sensitivity analyses. Adjusted effect estimates were robust to empirical calibration. Network meta-analysis confirmed original findings but indicated weaker effects than originally published. Meta-analysis of drugs within the GLP-1RA class against DPP4-i provided evidence that effects vary within the GLP-1RA class, indicating stronger effects for exenatide and weaker effects of dulaglutide.

Conclusions: This study supports and establishes the reliability of the original study by (1) producing consistent findings in a range of alternate databases and populations, (2) demonstrating effects for multiple drugs within the GLP-1RA class, and (3) independently confirming the reproducibility of the original study and its findings. This reliability evaluation provides the beginnings of a broader framework for using standardized tools and distributed data networks to systematically interrogate the reliability of findings generated using observational data.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 医学-药学

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

7.70%

发文量

173

审稿时长

3 months

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.