Cargando…

Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy

BACKGROUND: Due to time-dependent confounding by blood pressure and differential loss to follow-up, it is difficult to estimate the effectiveness of aggressive versus conventional antihypertensive combination therapies in non-randomized comparisons. METHODS: We utilized data from 22,576 hypertensive...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gerhard, Tobias, Delaney, Joseph AC, Cooper-DeHoff, Rhonda M, Shuster, Jonathan, Brumback, Babette A, Johnson, Julie A, Pepine, Carl J, Winterstein, Almut G
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3573973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22866767
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-119
_version_ 1782259538134564864
author Gerhard, Tobias
Delaney, Joseph AC
Cooper-DeHoff, Rhonda M
Shuster, Jonathan
Brumback, Babette A
Johnson, Julie A
Pepine, Carl J
Winterstein, Almut G
author_facet Gerhard, Tobias
Delaney, Joseph AC
Cooper-DeHoff, Rhonda M
Shuster, Jonathan
Brumback, Babette A
Johnson, Julie A
Pepine, Carl J
Winterstein, Almut G
author_sort Gerhard, Tobias
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Due to time-dependent confounding by blood pressure and differential loss to follow-up, it is difficult to estimate the effectiveness of aggressive versus conventional antihypertensive combination therapies in non-randomized comparisons. METHODS: We utilized data from 22,576 hypertensive coronary artery disease patients, prospectively enrolled in the INternational VErapamil-Trandolapril STudy (INVEST). Our post-hoc analyses did not consider the randomized treatment strategies, but instead defined exposure time-dependently as aggressive treatment (≥3 concomitantly used antihypertensive medications) versus conventional treatment (≤2 concomitantly used antihypertensive medications). Study outcome was defined as time to first serious cardiovascular event (non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or all-cause death). We compared hazard ratio (HR) estimates for aggressive vs. conventional treatment from a Marginal Structural Cox Model (MSCM) to estimates from a standard Cox model. Both models included exposure to antihypertensive treatment at each follow-up visit, demographics, and baseline cardiovascular risk factors, including blood pressure. The MSCM further adjusted for systolic blood pressure at each follow-up visit, through inverse probability of treatment weights. RESULTS: 2,269 (10.1%) patients experienced a cardiovascular event over a total follow-up of 60,939 person-years. The HR for aggressive treatment estimated by the standard Cox model was 0.96 (95% confidence interval 0.87-1.07). The equivalent MSCM, which was able to account for changes in systolic blood pressure during follow-up, estimated a HR of 0.81 (95% CI 0.71-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Using a MSCM, aggressive treatment was associated with a lower risk for serious cardiovascular outcomes compared to conventional treatment. In contrast, a standard Cox model estimated similar risks for aggressive and conventional treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00133692
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3573973
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35739732013-02-16 Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy Gerhard, Tobias Delaney, Joseph AC Cooper-DeHoff, Rhonda M Shuster, Jonathan Brumback, Babette A Johnson, Julie A Pepine, Carl J Winterstein, Almut G BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Due to time-dependent confounding by blood pressure and differential loss to follow-up, it is difficult to estimate the effectiveness of aggressive versus conventional antihypertensive combination therapies in non-randomized comparisons. METHODS: We utilized data from 22,576 hypertensive coronary artery disease patients, prospectively enrolled in the INternational VErapamil-Trandolapril STudy (INVEST). Our post-hoc analyses did not consider the randomized treatment strategies, but instead defined exposure time-dependently as aggressive treatment (≥3 concomitantly used antihypertensive medications) versus conventional treatment (≤2 concomitantly used antihypertensive medications). Study outcome was defined as time to first serious cardiovascular event (non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or all-cause death). We compared hazard ratio (HR) estimates for aggressive vs. conventional treatment from a Marginal Structural Cox Model (MSCM) to estimates from a standard Cox model. Both models included exposure to antihypertensive treatment at each follow-up visit, demographics, and baseline cardiovascular risk factors, including blood pressure. The MSCM further adjusted for systolic blood pressure at each follow-up visit, through inverse probability of treatment weights. RESULTS: 2,269 (10.1%) patients experienced a cardiovascular event over a total follow-up of 60,939 person-years. The HR for aggressive treatment estimated by the standard Cox model was 0.96 (95% confidence interval 0.87-1.07). The equivalent MSCM, which was able to account for changes in systolic blood pressure during follow-up, estimated a HR of 0.81 (95% CI 0.71-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Using a MSCM, aggressive treatment was associated with a lower risk for serious cardiovascular outcomes compared to conventional treatment. In contrast, a standard Cox model estimated similar risks for aggressive and conventional treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00133692 BioMed Central 2012-08-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3573973/ /pubmed/22866767 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-119 Text en Copyright ©2012 Gerhard et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gerhard, Tobias
Delaney, Joseph AC
Cooper-DeHoff, Rhonda M
Shuster, Jonathan
Brumback, Babette A
Johnson, Julie A
Pepine, Carl J
Winterstein, Almut G
Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy
title Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy
title_full Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy
title_fullStr Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy
title_full_unstemmed Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy
title_short Comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy
title_sort comparing marginal structural models to standard methods for estimating treatment effects of antihypertensive combination therapy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3573973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22866767
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-119
work_keys_str_mv AT gerhardtobias comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy
AT delaneyjosephac comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy
AT cooperdehoffrhondam comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy
AT shusterjonathan comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy
AT brumbackbabettea comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy
AT johnsonjuliea comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy
AT pepinecarlj comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy
AT wintersteinalmutg comparingmarginalstructuralmodelstostandardmethodsforestimatingtreatmenteffectsofantihypertensivecombinationtherapy