Target Trial Emulation Using Hospital-Based Observational Data: Demonstration and Application in COVID-19

Methodological biases are common in observational studies evaluating treatment effectiveness. The objective of this study is to emulate a target trial in a competing risks setting using hospital-based observational data. We extend established methodology accounting for immortal time bias and time-fixed confounding biases to a setting where no survival information beyond hospital discharge is available: a condition common to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) research data. This exemplary study includes a cohort of 618 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We describe methodological opportunities and challenges that cannot be overcome applying traditional statistical methods. We demonstrate the practical implementation of this trial emulation approach via clone–censor–weight techniques. We undertake a competing risk analysis, reporting the cause-specific cumulative hazards and cumulative incidence probabilities. Our analysis demonstrates that a target trial emulation framework can be extended to account for competing risks in COVID-19 hospital studies. In our analysis, we avoid immortal time bias, time-fixed confounding bias, and competing risks bias simultaneously. Choosing the length of the grace period is justified from a clinical perspective and has an important advantage in ensuring reliable results. This extended trial emulation with the competing risk analysis enables an unbiased estimation of treatment effects, along with the ability to interpret the effectiveness of treatment on all clinically important outcomes.

[1]  A. Adimora,et al.  Effectiveness of Remdesivir Treatment Protocols Among Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Target Trial Emulation , 2023, Epidemiology.

[2]  Hyon K. Choi,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 Vaccines Against COVID-19 Infection Among Patients With Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases on Immunomodulatory Medications , 2023, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[3]  Nicole M. Bouvier,et al.  Informative Censoring—A Cause of Bias in Estimating COVID-19 Mortality Using Hospital Data , 2023, Life.

[4]  D. Leaf,et al.  Target Trial Emulation: A Framework for Causal Inference From Observational Data. , 2022, JAMA.

[5]  Grant D. Huang,et al.  Effectiveness of COVID-19 treatment with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir or molnupiravir among U.S. Veterans: target trial emulation studies with one-month and six-month outcomes , 2022, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[6]  E. Schenck,et al.  Comparison of a Target Trial Emulation Framework vs Cox Regression to Estimate the Association of Corticosteroids With COVID-19 Mortality , 2022, JAMA network open.

[7]  M. Naesens,et al.  Bias by censoring for competing events in survival analysis , 2022, BMJ.

[8]  M. Hernán,et al.  Thromboprophylaxis with standard-dose vs. flexible-dose heparin for hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a target trial emulation , 2022, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology.

[9]  I. Agalliu,et al.  The analysis of COVID-19 in-hospital mortality: A competing risk approach or a cure model? , 2022, Statistical methods in medical research.

[10]  R. Keogh,et al.  Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Associated with COVID-19: An Emulated Target Trial Analysis , 2022, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[11]  D. Brodie,et al.  Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with acute covid-19 associated respiratory failure: comparative effectiveness study , 2022, BMJ.

[12]  Kevin J. Gleason,et al.  Handling death as an intercurrent event in time to recovery analysis in COVID-19 treatment clinical trials , 2022, Contemporary Clinical Trials.

[13]  Shuangge Ma,et al.  Statistical Methods for Accommodating Immortal Time: A Selective Review and Comparison , 2022, 2202.02369.

[14]  N. Ohmagari,et al.  Effectiveness of remdesivir in hospitalized nonsevere patients with COVID-19 in Japan: A large observational study using the COVID-19 Registry Japan , 2022, International Journal of Infectious Diseases.

[15]  G. Ioannou,et al.  Comparison of Moderna Versus Pfizer-Biontech COVID-19 Vaccine Outcomes: A Target Trial Emulation Study In the U.S. Veterans Affairs Healthcare System , 2022, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[16]  M. Hernán,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 Vaccines in U.S. Veterans , 2021, New England Journal of Medicine.

[17]  S. Solomon,et al.  Practical Recommendations on Quantifying and Interpreting Treatment Effects in the Presence of Terminal Competing Risks: A Review. , 2021, JAMA cardiology.

[18]  Z. S. Ramzi,et al.  Hospital readmissions and post-discharge all-cause mortality in COVID-19 recovered patients; A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2021, The American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

[19]  R. Wenzel,et al.  The Value of Medical Registries and Observational Studies Early in Pandemics: The COVID-19 Experience , 2021, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[20]  Grant D. Huang,et al.  Early Convalescent Plasma Therapy and Mortality Among US Veterans Hospitalized With Nonsevere COVID-19: An Observational Analysis Emulating a Target Trial , 2021, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[21]  G. Lyman,et al.  Opportunities and Challenges of Observational Studies and Randomized Controlled Trials for Evaluating the Therapeutic Efficacy of COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma , 2021, Cancer investigation.

[22]  E. Stuart,et al.  A Trial Emulation Approach for Policy Evaluations with Group-level Longitudinal Data. , 2021, Epidemiology.

[23]  M. Wolkewitz,et al.  Methodological evaluation of bias in observational coronavirus disease 2019 studies on drug effectiveness , 2021, Clinical Microbiology and Infection.

[24]  S. Suissa,et al.  Biases in evaluating the safety and effectiveness of drugs for covid-19: designing real-world evidence studies , 2021, American journal of epidemiology.

[25]  J. Carrero,et al.  Pharmacoepidemiology for nephrologists (part 2): potential biases and how to overcome them , 2020, Clinical kidney journal.

[26]  J. Rigdon,et al.  Evaluating sources of bias in observational studies of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker use during coronavirus disease 2019: beyond confounding. , 2020, Journal of hypertension.

[27]  Avi Feller,et al.  A trial emulation approach for policy evaluations with group-level longitudinal data , 2020, ArXiv.

[28]  M. Wolkewitz,et al.  Harmonizing Heterogeneous Endpoints in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Trials Without Loss of Information , 2020, Critical Care Medicine.

[29]  Samantha K. Brenner,et al.  Association Between Early Treatment With Tocilizumab and Mortality Among Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19. , 2020, JAMA internal medicine.

[30]  A. Barnett,et al.  Statistical Analysis of Clinical COVID-19 Data: A Concise Overview of Lessons Learned, Common Errors and How to Avoid Them , 2020, Clinical epidemiology.

[31]  Shaghayegh Haghjooy Javanmard,et al.  A one-year hospital-based prospective COVID-19 open-cohort in the Eastern Mediterranean region: The Khorshid COVID Cohort (KCC) study , 2020, medRxiv.

[32]  B. Rachet,et al.  Reflection on modern methods: trial emulation in the presence of immortal-time bias. Assessing the benefit of major surgery for elderly lung cancer patients using observational data , 2020, International journal of epidemiology.

[33]  J. Twisk,et al.  Ignoring competing events in the analysis of survival data may lead to biased results: a non-mathematical illustration of competing risk analysis. , 2020, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[34]  M. Hernán,et al.  Estimates of Overall Survival in Patients With Cancer Receiving Different Treatment Regimens , 2020, JAMA network open.

[35]  D. Jernigan,et al.  Update: Public Health Response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak — United States, February 24, 2020 , 2020, MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report.

[36]  Eric J Tchetgen Tchetgen,et al.  A causal framework for classical statistical estimands in failure‐time settings with competing events , 2018, Statistics in medicine.

[37]  M. V. van Noorden,et al.  Correcting for dependent censoring in routine outcome monitoring data by applying the inverse probability censoring weighted estimator , 2018, Statistical methods in medical research.

[38]  Miguel A Hernán,et al.  How to estimate the effect of treatment duration on survival outcomes using observational data , 2018, British Medical Journal.

[39]  P. Stang,et al.  Methods for time‐varying exposure related problems in pharmacoepidemiology: An overview , 2017, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[40]  James M Robins,et al.  Per-Protocol Analyses of Pragmatic Trials. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[41]  Martin Schumacher,et al.  Basic parametric analysis for a multi-state model in hospital epidemiology , 2017, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[42]  S. Cole,et al.  Inverse probability of treatment-weighted competing risks analysis: an application on long-term risk of urinary adverse events after prostate cancer treatments , 2017, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[43]  Martin Schumacher,et al.  Multistate Modeling to Analyze Nosocomial Infection Data: An Introduction and Demonstration , 2017, Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.

[44]  M. Schumacher,et al.  Survival biases lead to flawed conclusions in observational treatment studies of influenza patients. , 2017, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[45]  P. Austin,et al.  Accounting for competing risks in randomized controlled trials: a review and recommendations for improvement , 2017, Statistics in medicine.

[46]  M. Westover,et al.  Causal inference as an emerging statistical approach in neurology: an example for epilepsy in the elderly , 2016, Clinical epidemiology.

[47]  P. Gustafson,et al.  Comparison of Statistical Approaches for Dealing With Immortal Time Bias in Drug Effectiveness Studies. , 2016, American journal of epidemiology.

[48]  James M Robins,et al.  Using Big Data to Emulate a Target Trial When a Randomized Trial Is Not Available. , 2016, American journal of epidemiology.

[49]  Jason P. Fine,et al.  Statistical Primer for Cardiovascular Research Introduction to the Analysis of Survival Data in the Presence of Competing Risks , 2022 .

[50]  C. van Walraven,et al.  Competing risk bias was common in Kaplan-Meier risk estimates published in prominent medical journals. , 2016, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[51]  Carmine Zoccali,et al.  When do we need competing risks methods for survival analysis in nephrology? , 2013, Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association.

[52]  Elizabeth A Stuart,et al.  Prognostic score-based balance measures can be a useful diagnostic for propensity score methods in comparative effectiveness research. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[53]  J. Fine,et al.  A competing risks analysis should report results on all cause-specific hazards and cumulative incidence functions. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[54]  H. Putter,et al.  Competing risks in epidemiology: possibilities and pitfalls. , 2012, International journal of epidemiology.

[55]  Martin Schumacher,et al.  Competing Risks and Multistate Models with R , 2011 .

[56]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Causal Inference , 2010 .

[57]  Samy Suissa,et al.  Immortal time bias in pharmaco-epidemiology. , 2008, American journal of epidemiology.