An analytical approach to characterize morbidity profile dissimilarity between distinct cohorts using electronic medical records

AbstractWe describe a two-stage analytical approach for characterizing morbidity profile dissimilarity among patient cohorts using electronic medical records. We capture morbidities using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-9) codes. In the first stage of the approach separate logistic regression analyses for ICD-9 sections (e.g., “hypertensive disease” or “appendicitis”) are conducted, and the odds ratios that describe adjusted differences in prevalence between two cohorts are displayed graphically. In the second stage, the results from ICD-9 section analyses are combined into a general morbidity dissimilarity index (MDI). For illustration, we examine nine cohorts of patients representing six phenotypes (or controls) derived from five institutions, each a participant in the electronic MEdical REcords and GEnomics (eMERGE) network. The phenotypes studied include type II diabetes and type II diabetes controls, peripheral arterial disease and peripheral arterial disease controls, normal cardiac conduction as measured by electrocardiography, and senile cataracts

Factors Influencing the Statistical Power of Complex Data Analysis Protocols for Molecular Signature Development from Microarray Data

Critical to the development of molecular signatures from microarray and other high-throughput data is testing the statistical significance of the produced signature in order to ensure its statistical reproducibility. While current best practices emphasize sufficiently powered univariate tests of differential expression, little is known about the factors that affect the statistical power of complex multivariate analysis protocols for high-dimensional molecular signature development.We show that choices of specific components of the analysis (i.e., error metric, classifier, error estimator and event balancing) have large and compounding effects on statistical power. The effects are demonstrated empirically by an analysis of 7 of the largest microarray cancer outcome prediction datasets and supplementary simulations, and by contrasting them to prior analyses of the same data.THE FINDINGS OF THE PRESENT STUDY HAVE TWO IMPORTANT PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: First, high-throughput studies by avoiding under-powered data analysis protocols, can achieve substantial economies in sample required to demonstrate statistical significance of predictive signal. Factors that affect power are identified and studied. Much less sample than previously thought may be sufficient for exploratory studies as long as these factors are taken into consideration when designing and executing the analysis. Second, previous highly-cited claims that microarray assays may not be able to predict disease outcomes better than chance are shown by our experiments to be due to under-powered data analysis combined with inappropriate statistical tests

Opportunity for Genotype-Guided Prescribing Among Adult Patients in 11 US Health Systems.

The value of utilizing a multigene pharmacogenetic panel to tailor pharmacotherapy is contingent on the prevalence of prescribed medications with an actionable pharmacogenetic association. The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) has categorized over 35 gene-drug pairs as "level A," for which there is sufficiently strong evidence to recommend that genetic information be used to guide drug prescribing. The opportunity to use genetic information to tailor pharmacotherapy among adult patients was determined by elucidating the exposure to CPIC level A drugs among 11 Implementing Genomics In Practice Network (IGNITE)-affiliated health systems across the US. Inpatient and/or outpatient electronic-prescribing data were collected between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016 for patients ≥ 18 years of age who had at least one medical encounter that was eligible for drug prescribing in a calendar year. A median of ~ 7.2 million adult patients was available for assessment of drug prescribing per year. From 2011 to 2016, the annual estimated prevalence of exposure to at least one CPIC level A drug prescribed to unique patients ranged between 15,719 (95% confidence interval (CI): 15,658-15,781) in 2011 to 17,335 (CI: 17,283-17,386) in 2016 per 100,000 patients. The estimated annual exposure to at least 2 drugs was above 7,200 per 100,000 patients in most years of the study, reaching an apex of 7,660 (CI: 7,632-7,687) per 100,000 patients in 2014. An estimated 4,748 per 100,000 prescribing events were potentially eligible for a genotype-guided intervention. Results from this study show that a significant portion of adults treated at medical institutions across the United States is exposed to medications for which genetic information, if available, should be used to guide prescribing

Prescribing Prevalence of Medications With Potential Genotype-Guided Dosing in Pediatric Patients

Importance: Genotype-guided prescribing in pediatrics could prevent adverse drug reactions and improve therapeutic response. Clinical pharmacogenetic implementation guidelines are available for many medications commonly prescribed to children. Frequencies of medication prescription and actionable genotypes (genotypes where a prescribing change may be indicated) inform the potential value of pharmacogenetic implementation. Objective: To assess potential opportunities for genotype-guided prescribing in pediatric populations among multiple health systems by examining the prevalence of prescriptions for each drug with the highest level of evidence (Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium level A) and estimating the prevalence of potential actionable prescribing decisions. Design, setting, and participants: This serial cross-sectional study of prescribing prevalences in 16 health systems included electronic health records data from pediatric inpatient and outpatient encounters from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2017. The health systems included academic medical centers with free-standing children's hospitals and community hospitals that were part of an adult health care system. Participants included approximately 2.9 million patients younger than 21 years observed per year. Data were analyzed from June 5, 2018, to April 14, 2020. Exposures: Prescription of 38 level A medications based on electronic health records. Main outcomes and measures: Annual prevalence of level A medication prescribing and estimated actionable exposures, calculated by combining estimated site-year prevalences across sites with each site weighted equally. Results: Data from approximately 2.9 million pediatric patients (median age, 8 [interquartile range, 2-16] years; 50.7% female, 62.3% White) were analyzed for a typical calendar year. The annual prescribing prevalence of at least 1 level A drug ranged from 7987 to 10 629 per 100 000 patients with increasing trends from 2011 to 2014. The most prescribed level A drug was the antiemetic ondansetron (annual prevalence of exposure, 8107 [95% CI, 8077-8137] per 100 000 children). Among commonly prescribed opioids, annual prevalence per 100 000 patients was 295 (95% CI, 273-317) for tramadol, 571 (95% CI, 557-586) for codeine, and 2116 (95% CI, 2097-2135) for oxycodone. The antidepressants citalopram, escitalopram, and amitriptyline were also commonly prescribed (annual prevalence, approximately 250 per 100 000 patients for each). Estimated prevalences of actionable exposures were highest for oxycodone and ondansetron (>300 per 100 000 patients annually). CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 substrates were more frequently prescribed than medications influenced by other genes. Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that opportunities for pharmacogenetic implementation among pediatric patients in the US are abundant. As expected, the greatest opportunity exists with implementing CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 pharmacogenetic guidance for commonly prescribed antiemetics, analgesics, and antidepressants

Survey design and analysis considerations when utilizing misclassified sampling strata

Abstract Background A large multi-center survey was conducted to understand patients’ perspectives on biobank study participation with particular focus on racial and ethnic minorities. In order to enrich the study sample with racial and ethnic minorities, disproportionate stratified sampling was implemented with strata defined by electronic health records (EHR) that are known to be inaccurate. We investigate the effect of sampling strata misclassification in complex survey design. Methods Under non-differential and differential misclassification in the sampling strata, we compare the validity and precision of three simple and common analysis approaches for settings in which the primary exposure is used to define the sampling strata. We also compare the precision gains/losses observed from using a disproportionate stratified sampling scheme compared to using a simple random sample under varying degrees of strata misclassification. Results Disproportionate stratified sampling can result in more efficient parameter estimates of the rare subgroups (race/ethnic minorities) in the sampling strata compared to simple random sampling. When sampling strata misclassification is non-differential with respect to the outcome, a design-agnostic analysis was preferred over model-based and design-based analyses. All methods yielded unbiased parameter estimates but standard error estimates were lowest from the design-agnostic analysis. However, when misclassification is differential, only the design-based method produced valid parameter estimates of the variables included in the sampling strata. Conclusions In complex survey design, when the interest is in making inference on rare subgroups, we recommend implementing disproportionate stratified sampling over simple random sampling even if the sampling strata are misclassified. If the misclassification is non-differential, we recommend a design-agnostic analysis. However, if the misclassification is differential, we recommend using design-based analyses