Li Xiaojuan, Young Jessica G, Toh Sengwee
Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2017 Dec;4(4):288-297. doi: 10.1007/s40471-017-0124-x. Epub 2017 Oct 17.
Pharmacoepidemiologists are often interested in estimating the effects of dynamic treatment strategies, where treatments are modified based on patients' evolving characteristics. For such problems, appropriate control of both baseline and time-varying confounders is critical. Conventional methods that control confounding by including time-varying treatments and confounders in an outcome regression model may not have a causal interpretation, even when all baseline and time-varying confounders are measured. This problem occurs when time-varying confounders are, themselves, affected by past treatment. We review alternative analytic approaches that can produce valid inferences in the presence of such confounding. We focus on the parametric g-formula and inverse probability weighting of marginal structural models, two examples of Robins' g-methods.
Unlike standard outcome regression methods, the parametric g-formula and inverse probability weighting of marginal structural models can estimate the effects of dynamic treatment strategies and appropriately control for measured time-varying confounders affected by prior treatment. Few applications of g-methods exist in the pharmacoepidemiology literature, primarily due to the common use of administrative claims data, which typically lack detailed measurements of time-varying information, and the limited availability of or familiarity with tools to help perform the relatively complex analysis. These barriers may be overcome with the increasing availability of data sources containing more detailed time-varying information and more accessible learning tools and software.
With appropriate data and study design, g-methods can improve our ability to make causal inferences on dynamic treatment strategies from observational data in pharmacoepidemiology.
药物流行病学家常常对评估动态治疗策略的效果感兴趣,在这种策略中,治疗会根据患者不断变化的特征进行调整。对于此类问题,恰当控制基线和随时间变化的混杂因素至关重要。通过在结局回归模型中纳入随时间变化的治疗和混杂因素来控制混杂的传统方法可能没有因果解释,即使所有基线和随时间变化的混杂因素都已测量。当随时间变化的混杂因素本身受到过去治疗的影响时,就会出现这个问题。我们综述了在存在此类混杂情况下能够产生有效推断的替代分析方法。我们重点关注参数化g公式和边际结构模型的逆概率加权,这是罗宾斯g方法的两个例子。
与标准结局回归方法不同,参数化g公式和边际结构模型的逆概率加权能够估计动态治疗策略的效果,并适当地控制受先前治疗影响的已测量的随时间变化的混杂因素。g方法在药物流行病学文献中的应用很少,主要是因为通常使用行政索赔数据,这些数据通常缺乏随时间变化信息的详细测量,而且用于帮助进行相对复杂分析的工具的可用性有限或人们对其并不熟悉。随着包含更详细随时间变化信息的数据源以及更易于使用的学习工具和软件的日益增多,这些障碍可能会被克服。
通过适当的数据和研究设计,g方法可以提高我们从药物流行病学观察数据中对动态治疗策略进行因果推断的能力。