Methodological comparison of marginal structural model, time-varying Cox regression, and propensity score methods: the example of antidepressant use and the risk of hip fracture

Publication date

2016

Authors

Ali, M SanniISNI 0000000419508349
Groenwold, Rolf H.H.ISNI 0000000394374611
Belitser, S.ISNI 000000041942150X
Souverein, Patrick C.ORCID 0000-0002-7452-0477ISNI 0000000392263686
Martín, Elisa
Gatto, Nicolle M
Huerta, Consuelo
Gardarsdottir, HelgaORCID 0000-0001-5623-9684ISNI 0000000395317045
Roes, Kit C B
Hoes, Arno W

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

taverne

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Observational studies including time-varying treatments are prone to confounding. We compared time-varying Cox regression analysis, propensity score (PS) methods, and marginal structural models (MSMs) in a study of antidepressant [selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)] use and the risk of hip fracture. METHODS: A cohort of patients with a first prescription for antidepressants (SSRI or tricyclic antidepressants) was extracted from the Dutch Mondriaan and Spanish Base de datos para la Investigación Farmacoepidemiológica en Atención Primaria (BIFAP) general practice databases for the period 2001-2009. The net (total) effect of SSRI versus no SSRI on the risk of hip fracture was estimated using time-varying Cox regression, stratification and covariate adjustment using the PS, and MSM. In MSM, censoring was accounted for by inverse probability of censoring weights. RESULTS: The crude hazard ratio (HR) of SSRI use versus no SSRI use on hip fracture was 1.75 (95%CI: 1.12, 2.72) in Mondriaan and 2.09 (1.89, 2.32) in BIFAP. After confounding adjustment using time-varying Cox regression, stratification, and covariate adjustment using the PS, HRs increased in Mondriaan [2.59 (1.63, 4.12), 2.64 (1.63, 4.25), and 2.82 (1.63, 4.25), respectively] and decreased in BIFAP [1.56 (1.40, 1.73), 1.54 (1.39, 1.71), and 1.61 (1.45, 1.78), respectively]. MSMs with stabilized weights yielded HR 2.15 (1.30, 3.55) in Mondriaan and 1.63 (1.28, 2.07) in BIFAP when accounting for censoring and 2.13 (1.32, 3.45) in Mondriaan and 1.66 (1.30, 2.12) in BIFAP without accounting for censoring. CONCLUSIONS: In this empirical study, differences between the different methods to control for time-dependent confounding were small. The observed differences in treatment effect estimates between the databases are likely attributable to different confounding information in the datasets, illustrating that adequate information on (time-varying) confounding is crucial to prevent bias. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords

bias; collider stratification; confounding; Cox model; inverse probability of treatment weighting; time-dependent propensity score; time-varying treatment; pharmacoepidemiology, Taverne

Citation

Ali, M S, Groenwold, R H H, Belitser, S, Souverein, P C, Martín, E, Gatto, N M, Huerta, C, Gardarsdottir, H, Roes, K C B, Hoes, A W, de Boer, A & Klungel, O H 2016, 'Methodological comparison of marginal structural model, time-varying Cox regression, and propensity score methods : the example of antidepressant use and the risk of hip fracture', Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, vol. 25, no. Suppl 1, pp. 114-121. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3864