Abstract
Importance Communication and adoption of modern study design and analytical techniques is of high importance for the improvement of clinical research from observational data.
Objective To compare (1) a modern method for causal inference including a target trial emulation framework and doubly robust estimation to (2) approaches common in the clinical literature such as Cox proportional hazards models. To do this, we estimate the effect of corticosteroids on mortality for moderate-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We use the World Health Organization’s (WHO) meta-analysis of corticosteroid randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as a benchmark.
Design Retrospective cohort study using longitudinal electronic health record data for 28 days from time of hospitalization.
Settings Multi-center New York City hospital system.
Participants Adult patients hospitalized between March 1-May 15, 2020 with COVID-19 and not on corticosteroids for chronic use.
Intervention Corticosteroid exposure defined as >0.5mg/kg methylprednisolone equivalent in a 24-hour period. For target trial emulation, interventions are (1) corticosteroids for six days if and when patient meets criteria for severe hypoxia and (2) no corticosteroids. For approaches common in clinical literature, treatment definitions used for variables in Cox regression models vary by study design (no time frame, one-, and five-days from time of severe hypoxia).
Main outcome 28-day mortality from time of hospitalization.
Results 3,298 patients (median age 65 (IQR 53-77), 60% male). 423 receive corticosteroids at any point during hospitalization, 699 die within 28 days of hospitalization. Target trial emulation estimates corticosteroids to reduce 28-day mortality from 32.2% (95% CI 30.9-33.5) to 25.7% (24.5-26.9). This estimate is qualitatively identical to the WHO’s RCT meta-analysis odds ratio of 0.66 (0.53-0.82)). Hazard ratios using methods comparable to current corticosteroid research range in size and direction from 0.50 (0.41-0.62) to 1.08 (0.80-1.47).
Conclusion and Relevance Clinical research based on observational data can unveil true causal relationships; however, the correctness of these effect estimates requires designing the study and analyzing the data based on principles which are different from the current standard in clinical research.
Question How do modern methods for causal inference compare to approaches common in the clinical literature when estimating the effect of corticosteroids on mortality for moderate-to-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients?
Findings In an analysis using retrospective data for 3,298 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, target trial emulation using a doubly robust estimation procedure successfully recovers a randomized controlled trial (RCT) meta-analysis benchmark. In contrast, analytic approaches common in the clinical research literature generally cannot recover the benchmark.
Meaning Clinical research based on observational data can unveil true causal relations. However, the correctness of these effect estimates requires designing and analyzing the data based on principles which are different from the current standard in clinical research. Widespread communication and adoption of these analytical techniques are of high importance for the improvement of clinical research.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr. Edward Schenck is supported by NHLBI HL151876 and reports consulting for Axle Informatics regarding Coronavirus vaccine clinical trial through NIAID and receiving honoraria from American Thoracic Society outside of the current work. Dr. Michael Satlin is supported by research grants from Allergan, Merck, BioFire Diagnostics, and SNIPRBiome and reports consulting payments from Shionogi outside of the current work.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Weill Cornell Medicine with a waiver of informed consent.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
This version of the manuscript has been revised to incorporate peer reviewer comments.
Data Availability
Data produced in the present study are available in HIPAA compliant de-identified form upon reasonable request to the authors.
