Performance of Time-dependent Propensity Scores: a Pharmacoepidemiology Case Study
Overview
Public Health
Authors
Affiliations
Purpose: Pharmacoepidemiologic studies of acute effects of episodic exposures often must control for many time-dependent confounders. Marginal structural models permit this and provide unbiased estimates when confounders are on the causal pathway. However, if causal pathway confounding is minimal, analyses with time-dependent propensity scores, calculated for time periods defined by individual drug prescriptions, may have better efficiency. We justify time-dependent propensity scores and compare the performance of these methods in a case study from a previous investigation of the risk of medication toxicity death in current users of propoxyphene and hydrocodone, with both substantial time-dependent confounding and a large number of covariates.
Methods: The cohort included Tennessee Medicaid enrollees who filled a qualifying study opioid prescription between 1992 and 2007. We identified 22 time-dependent covariates that accounted for most of the confounding in the original study. We compared analyses with all covariates in the regression model with those based on time-dependent propensity scores and those from marginal structural models.
Results: We identified 489,008 persons with 1,771,295 propoxyphene and 4,088,754 hydrocodone prescriptions. The unadjusted hazard ratio (propoxyphene : hydrocodone) was 0.70 (95%CI, 0.46-1.07). Estimates from inclusion of all covariates in the model, time-dependent propensity score analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting, and marginal structural models were 1.63 (1.04-2.57), 1.65 (1.01-2.72), and 1.64 (0.83-3.27), respectively. Findings varied little with use of alternative propensity score methods, time origin, or techniques for marginal structural model estimation.
Conclusions: Time-dependent propensity scores may be useful for pharmacoepidemiologic studies with time-varying exposures when causal pathway confounding is limited.
Corriere M, Daniel L, Dickson A, Nepal P, Hall K, Plummer W Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2023; 114(5):1050-1057.
PMID: 37548889 PMC: 10592148. DOI: 10.1002/cpt.3019.
Waddingham E, Miller A, Dobson R, Matthews P Front Neurol. 2022; 13:799531.
PMID: 35418938 PMC: 8996123. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.799531.
Ray W, Chung C, Murray K, Malow B, Daugherty J, Stein C PLoS Med. 2021; 18(7):e1003709.
PMID: 34264928 PMC: 8321368. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003709.
Kubiszewski P, Sugita L, Kourkoulis C, DiPucchio Z, Schwab K, Anderson C JAMA Neurol. 2020; .
PMID: 32865558 PMC: 7489430. DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.3142.
Outcomes of Hydroxychloroquine Usage in United States Veterans Hospitalized with COVID-19.
Magagnoli J, Narendran S, Pereira F, Cummings T, Hardin J, Sutton S Med. 2020; 1(1):114-127.e3.
PMID: 32838355 PMC: 7274588. DOI: 10.1016/j.medj.2020.06.001.