Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Flatiron Health, New York, NY, USA.
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2019 May;28(5):572-581. doi: 10.1002/pds.4758. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
The aim of this study was to assess the impact of missing death data on survival analyses conducted in an oncology EHR-derived database.
The study was conducted using the Flatiron Health oncology database and the National Death Index (NDI) as a gold standard. Three analytic frameworks were evaluated in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients: median overall survival [mOS]), relative risk estimates conducted within the EHR-derived database, and "external control arm" analyses comparing an experimental group augmented with mortality data from the gold standard to a control group from the EHR-derived database only. The hazard ratios (HRs) obtained within the EHR-derived database (91% sensitivity) and the external control arm analyses, were compared with results when both groups were augmented with mortality data from the gold standard. The above analyses were repeated using simulated lower mortality sensitivities to understand the impact of more extreme levels of missing deaths.
Bias in mOS ranged from modest (0.6-0.9 mos.) in the EHR-derived cohort with (91% sensitivity) to substantial when lower sensitivities were generated through simulation (3.3-9.7 mos.). Overall, small differences were observed in the HRs for the EHR-derived cohort across comparative analyses when compared with HRs obtained using the gold standard data source. When only one treatment arm was subject to estimation bias, the bias was slightly more pronounced, but increased substantially when lower sensitivities were simulated.
The impact on survival analysis is minimal with high mortality sensitivity with only modest impact associated within external control arm applications.
本研究旨在评估在肿瘤电子病历数据库中进行生存分析时缺失死亡数据的影响。
该研究使用了 Flatiron Health 肿瘤学数据库和国家死亡指数(NDI)作为金标准。在晚期非小细胞肺癌(aNSCLC)患者中评估了三种分析框架:中位总生存期(mOS))、在电子病历数据库中进行的相对风险估计,以及将实验组与金标准中的死亡率数据进行比较的“外部对照臂”分析,与仅从电子病历数据库获得的对照组进行比较。在电子病历数据库中获得的风险比(HR)(91%的灵敏度)和外部对照臂分析,与当两组都用金标准中的死亡率数据进行扩充时的结果进行了比较。使用模拟的较低死亡率灵敏度重复了上述分析,以了解更极端的缺失死亡水平的影响。
mOS 的偏差范围从适度(0.6-0.9 mos.)到电子病历数据库中(91%的灵敏度)到模拟较低灵敏度时的显著偏差(3.3-9.7 mos.)。总体而言,与使用金标准数据源获得的 HR 相比,电子病历数据库中比较分析的 HR 差异较小。当只有一个治疗臂受到估计偏差的影响时,偏差稍微明显,但当模拟较低灵敏度时,偏差会显著增加。
在高死亡率灵敏度下,对生存分析的影响最小,仅在外部对照臂应用中存在适度影响。