Lingyi Li, Mahyar Etminan, Gilaad G Kaplan, Helen Tremlett, Hui Xie, J Antonio Aviña-Zubieta
{"title":"Multiple Sclerosis Risk Among Anti-tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Users: A Methodological Review of Observational Studies Based on Real-world Data.","authors":"Lingyi Li, Mahyar Etminan, Gilaad G Kaplan, Helen Tremlett, Hui Xie, J Antonio Aviña-Zubieta","doi":"10.2174/1574886318666230726162245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Epidemiologic studies on the risk of multiple sclerosis (MS) or demyelinating events associated with anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) use among patients with rheumatic diseases or inflammatory bowel diseases have shown conflicting results. Causal directed acyclic graphs (cDAGs) are useful tools for understanding the differing results and identifying the structure of potential contributing biases. Most of the available literature on cDAGs uses language that might be unfamiliar to clinicians. This article demonstrates how cDAGs can be used to determine whether there is a confounder, a mediator or collider-stratification bias and when to adjust for them appropriately. We also use a case study to show how to control for potential biases by drawing a cDAG depicting anti-TNFα use and its potential to contribute to MS onset. Finally, we describe potential biases that might have led to contradictory results in previous studies that examined the effect of anti-TNFα and MS, including confounding, confounding by contraindication, and bias due to measurement error. Clinicians and researchers should be cognizant of confounding, confounding by contraindication, and bias due to measurement error when reviewing future studies on the risk of MS or demyelinating events associated with anti-TNFα use. cDAGs are a useful tool for selecting variables and identifying the structure of different biases that can affect the validity of observational studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":10777,"journal":{"name":"Current drug safety","volume":" ","pages":"200-207"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current drug safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1574886318666230726162245","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Epidemiologic studies on the risk of multiple sclerosis (MS) or demyelinating events associated with anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) use among patients with rheumatic diseases or inflammatory bowel diseases have shown conflicting results. Causal directed acyclic graphs (cDAGs) are useful tools for understanding the differing results and identifying the structure of potential contributing biases. Most of the available literature on cDAGs uses language that might be unfamiliar to clinicians. This article demonstrates how cDAGs can be used to determine whether there is a confounder, a mediator or collider-stratification bias and when to adjust for them appropriately. We also use a case study to show how to control for potential biases by drawing a cDAG depicting anti-TNFα use and its potential to contribute to MS onset. Finally, we describe potential biases that might have led to contradictory results in previous studies that examined the effect of anti-TNFα and MS, including confounding, confounding by contraindication, and bias due to measurement error. Clinicians and researchers should be cognizant of confounding, confounding by contraindication, and bias due to measurement error when reviewing future studies on the risk of MS or demyelinating events associated with anti-TNFα use. cDAGs are a useful tool for selecting variables and identifying the structure of different biases that can affect the validity of observational studies.
期刊介绍:
Current Drug Safety publishes frontier articles on all the latest advances on drug safety. The journal aims to publish the highest quality research articles, reviews and case reports in the field. Topics covered include: adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes, management of adverse effects, pharmacovigilance and pharmacoepidemiology of new and existing drugs, post-marketing surveillance. The journal is essential reading for all researchers and clinicians involved in drug safety.