Using quantitative bias analysis to adjust for misclassification of COVID-19 outcomes: An applied example of inhaled corticosteroids and COVID-19 outcomes

Marleen Bokern,Christopher T. Rentsch,Jennifer K Quint,Jacob Hunnicutt,Ian J Douglas,Anna Schultze
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.13.24311341
2024-08-14
Abstract:During the pandemic, there was concern that underascertainment of COVID-19 outcomes may impact treatment effect estimation in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. We assessed the impact of outcome misclassification on the association between inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and COVID-19 hospitalisation and death in the UK during the first pandemic wave using probabilistic bias analysis (PBA). Using data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, we defined a cohort with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) on 01 Mar 2020. We compared the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death among users of ICS/long-acting β-agonist (LABA) and users of LABA/LAMA using inverse-probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) logistic regression. We used PBA to assess the impact of non-differential outcome misclassification. We assigned beta distributions to sensitivity and specificity and sampled from these 100,000 times for summary-level and 10,000 times for record-level PBA. Using these values, we simulated outcomes and applied IPTW logistic regression to adjust for confounding and misclassification. Sensitivity analyses excluded ICS+LABA+LAMA (triple therapy) users. Among 161,411 patients with COPD, ICS users had increased odds of COVID-19 hospitalisations and death compared with LABA/LAMA users (OR for COVID-19 hospitalisation 1.59 (95% CI 1.31 - 1.92), OR for COVID-19 death 1.63, 95% CI 1.26 - 2.11). After IPTW and exclusion of people using triple therapy, ORs moved towards null. All implementations of QBA, both record and summary-level PBA, modestly shifted ORs away from the null and increased uncertainty. The results provide reassurance that outcome misclassification was unlikely to change the conclusions of the study but confounding by indication remains a concern.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is the impact of the combined use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long - acting β - agonists (LABA) (ICS/LABA) compared to the combined use of long - acting β - agonists and long - acting anticholinergic drugs (LAMA) (LABA/LAMA) on the risk of COVID - 19 hospitalization and death during the first wave of the epidemic in the UK. Specifically, the study focused on the impact of outcome misclassification (i.e., the inaccuracy of COVID - 19 hospitalization and death records) on the estimation of this association. ### Research Background In the early days of the epidemic, there were concerns that patients with chronic respiratory diseases might be at a higher risk of severe COVID - 19 outcomes. However, early data showed that the proportion of patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in COVID - 19 deaths and hospitalizations was not significant. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), as an anti - inflammatory drug widely used in COPD, have attracted attention for their impact on COVID - 19 outcomes due to their immunosuppressive effects. Different observational studies have yielded inconsistent results, which may be due to the influence of various biases. ### Research Objectives 1. **Evaluate the impact of ICS/LABA and LABA/LAMA on the risk of COVID - 19 hospitalization and death**: The study compared the hospitalization and death risks of these two groups of patients through the inverse probability - weighted (IPTW) logistic regression model. 2. **Quantify the impact of outcome misclassification**: Use quantitative bias analysis (QBA), especially simple bias analysis (SBA) and probability bias analysis (PBA), to assess the impact of outcome misclassification on effect estimation. ### Methods - **Data Source**: The study used data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum, which contains patient data from primary care institutions in the UK. - **Study Population**: A cohort of patients diagnosed with COPD before March 1, 2020 was defined, excluding patients with asthma and other chronic respiratory diseases. - **Exposure**: Based on prescription records, users of ICS/LABA and LABA/LAMA were identified. - **Outcomes**: The primary outcomes were COVID - 19 hospitalization and death, obtained from hospital statistics (HES) and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registrations respectively. - **Statistical Analysis**: Use IPTW to adjust for potential confounding factors and conduct logistic regression analysis. In addition, SBA and PBA were carried out to assess the impact of outcome misclassification. ### Main Findings - **Unadjusted Model**: The unadjusted model showed that ICS users had a higher risk of COVID - 19 hospitalization and death. - **Adjusted Model**: After IPTW adjustment, these risks were reduced but still existed. - **Bias Analysis**: The results of SBA and PBA indicated that the impact of outcome misclassification on the conclusion was small, but confounding factors were still a concern. ### Conclusion The research results provide evidence that outcome misclassification is unlikely to change the main conclusions of the study, but the influence of confounding factors still needs to be further considered.