Systematic assessment of pharmaceutical prescriptions in association with cancer risk: a method to conduct a population-wide medication-wide longitudinal study

It is a public health priority to identify the adverse and non-adverse associations between pharmaceutical medications and cancer. We search for and evaluate associations between all prescribed medications and longitudinal cancer risk in participants of the Swedish Cancer Register (N = 9,014,975). We associated 552 different medications with incident cancer risk (any, breast, colon, and prostate) during 5.5 years of follow-up (7/1/2005-12/31/2010) in two types of statistical models, time-to-event and case-crossover. After multiple hypotheses correction and replication, 141 (26%) drugs were associated with any cancer in a time-to-event analysis constraining drug exposure to 1 year before first cancer diagnosis and adjusting for history of medication use. In a case-crossover analysis, 36 drugs (7%) were associated with decreased cancer risk. 12 drugs were found in common in both analyses with concordant direction of association. We found 14, 10, 7% of all drugs associated with colon, prostate, and breast cancers in time-to-event models. We only found 1, 2%, and 0% for these cancers, respectively, in case-crossover analyses. Pharmacoepidemiologic analyses of cancer risk are sensitive to modeling choices and false-positive findings are a threat. Medication-wide analyses using different analytical models may help suggest consistent signals of increased cancer risk.

[1]  David Madigan,et al.  Discussion: An estimate of the science-wise false discovery rate and application to the top medical literature. , 2014, Biostatistics.

[2]  Samy Suissa,et al.  The case-crossover study design in pharmacoepidemiology , 2009, Statistical methods in medical research.

[3]  David Madigan,et al.  Commentary: What Can We Really Learn From Observational Studies?: The Need for Empirical Assessment of Methodology for Active Drug Safety Surveillance and Comparative Effectiveness Research , 2011, Epidemiology.

[4]  Isabelle Boutron,et al.  Reporting of safety results in published reports of randomized controlled trials. , 2009, Archives of internal medicine.

[5]  D. Madigan,et al.  Empirical assessment of methods for risk identification in healthcare data: results from the experiments of the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Exposure‐wide epidemiology: revisiting Bradford Hill , 2016, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Potential increased risk of cancer from commonly used medications: an umbrella review of meta-analyses. , 2014, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[8]  William DuMouchel,et al.  Interpreting observational studies: why empirical calibration is needed to correct p-values , 2013, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  P Ryan,et al.  Novel Data‐Mining Methodologies for Adverse Drug Event Discovery and Analysis , 2012, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[10]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  p-Curve and p-Hacking in Observational Research , 2016, PloS one.

[11]  David Madigan,et al.  High-dimensional, massive sample-size Cox proportional hazards regression for survival analysis. , 2014, Biostatistics.

[12]  D. Madigan,et al.  Medication-Wide Association Studies , 2013, CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology.

[13]  J. Ioannidis Why Most Published Research Findings Are False , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[14]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[15]  R. Goldberg,et al.  Triggering of acute myocardial infarction by heavy physical exertion. Protection against triggering by regular exertion. Determinants of Myocardial Infarction Onset Study Investigators. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  H. Sørensen,et al.  The Nordic countries as a cohort for pharmacoepidemiological research. , 2010, Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology.

[17]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Systematic assessment of the correlations of household income with infectious, biochemical, physiological, and environmental factors in the United States, 1999-2006. , 2015, American journal of epidemiology.

[18]  J. Ioannidis Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated , 2008, Epidemiology.

[19]  Atul J. Butte,et al.  An Environment-Wide Association Study (EWAS) on Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus , 2010, PloS one.

[20]  Xuefeng Bruce Ling,et al.  Investigation of maternal environmental exposures in association with self-reported preterm birth. , 2014, Reproductive toxicology.

[21]  Atul J. Butte,et al.  A Nutrient-Wide Association Study on Blood Pressure , 2012, Circulation.

[22]  Atul J Butte,et al.  Systematic evaluation of environmental factors: persistent pollutants and nutrients correlated with serum lipid levels , 2012, International journal of epidemiology.

[23]  M Maclure,et al.  Should we use a case-crossover design? , 2000, Annual review of public health.

[24]  V. Prasad,et al.  Prespecified falsification end points: can they validate true observational associations? , 2013, JAMA.

[25]  Chirag J Patel,et al.  Systematic evaluation of environmental and behavioural factors associated with all-cause mortality in the United States national health and nutrition examination survey. , 2013, International journal of epidemiology.