Abstract
Importance Drug production not meeting the demand leaves affected patients in a vulnerable position.
Objective To describe incidence and prevalence of medicines with suggested shortages in at least one European country
Design We performed a descriptive cohort study between 2010 in a network of databases which have mapped their data to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM).
Setting Setting included primary care, secondary care, and various disease registries whose previously collected data was leveraged.
Participants We included all patients with at least 365 days of history on the database.
Exposures We investigated all medicines with a suggested shortage in at least one European country for more than 365 days (n=18). Furthermore, we assessed their alternatives as well (n=39).
Main outcomes and measures We estimated annual incidence rates and period prevalence of all medicines with suggested shortages and their alternatives. A drop in incidence or prevalence of more than 33% after the shortage announce by the European Medicines Agency was considered confirmation of a shortage.
Results Among 41 databases from Europe and the United States, we observed shortages according to incidence for 12 drugs and shortages according to prevalence for 4 drugs. The drugs varenicline, cetrorelix, and amoxicillin plus clavulanate were in shortage in the most countries.
Conclusion and relevance We compiled and analysed data of annual incidence and prevalence of 57 medicines among 41 databases in Europe and the United States. We detected shortages of several drugs and suggest monitoring and stewardship for drug availability.
Introduction
Drug shortages represent an important global health issue, posing clinical and economic threats to healthcare systems and public health worldwide.1 Drug shortages have been identified as a key public health issue since nearly the beginning of the 20th century, with impactful examples including the shortage of insulin in the early 1920s.2 For instance, several countries in the Northern hemisphere faced shortages of “basic medicines” such as antibiotics and painkillers for the treatment of respiratory tract infections, including paediatric formulations, during 2022 and 2023 winters).3, 4 The World Health Organization (WHO) highlighted the importance of drug shortages and identified them as a complex global challenge in 2012.5 In later documents, the WHO urged the Member States to develop strategies to mitigate their impact. 6 In recent years, works and actions against drug shortages have accelerated and become more visible worldwide.
In addition to a lack of common definitions, the causes of drug shortages can also differ between countries and regions, thus making the problem more complex. Therefore, different health authorities, agencies, and governments have developed different strategies, policies, action plans, and guidelines to address drug shortages and mitigate their potential impact. In 2013, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) launched the first catalogue of medicine shortages assessed by the Agency.7 Since that date, the EMA has regularly updated this catalogue in line with the current status of medicines under surveillance due to shortages in more than one European country. The list includes information such as the reason for the shortage, and recommendations regarding alternatives for patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders. The work of the task force that publishes the catalogue of drug shortages was temporarily suspended between March 2020 and December 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, the COVID-19 outbreak and the immediate need for vaccines in a global scale provided an example where drug shortages potential impact was critical. The world faced nearly all types of causes of shortages in a single defined medication group and time period. During the first months of the pandemic, countries across the world went into lockdown and local and global transportations were reduced or stopped, affecting most of the stages of the manufacturing supply chain, including the production and distribution of medicines and vaccines.8, 9 Moreover, due to the resulting uncertainty, patients started stockpiling.10 Ultimately, the feasible production rate was insufficient to cover the worldwide demand of COVID-19 vaccines and there was an unequal distribution where countries with the greatest economic power were served first.11
In addition to anxiety about shortages of essential medicines in communities, drug shortages can lead to significant harm including treatment failure, delays in care, suboptimal treatment outcomes, and therapy errors, particularly when alternative medications are unfamiliar. Furthermore, the treatment with alternative and potentially suboptimal medications may increase the risk of adverse reactions and/or potential drug interactions.12 Despite increased awareness about the importance of drug shortages and announcements of new recommendations/mitigation strategies, research directly focused on drug shortages from a broad perspective is very limited. The topic is mainly evaluated by reviews and consensus statements. Real World Data (RWD) can be a powerful research accelerator to improve the understanding of drug shortages in routine health care, providing timely and accurate information on the prevalence and incidence of medication use within the community and over time, as well as an opportunity to characterise adherence behaviour at the patient level.
The European Health Data & Evidence Network (EHDEN, https://www.ehden.eu/) funded and supported the harmonisation of more than 187 European data bases covering over 200 million people into the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM). 1314 We leveraged the resulting EHDEN federated network and ecosystem to study the use of medicines at risk of shortages and alternative treatments in Europe and the United States. After an open call for participation, we analysed 41 real world data sources from 18 countries: Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Türkiye, UK, and the USA.
Methods
Study design
We conducted a large-scale observational, retrospective, population-based cohort study to assess the incidence and prevalence of 18 medicines with reported drug shortages in Europe and 39 of their alternatives.
Data Sources
We used routinely collected, longitudinal observational healthcare data from data sources standardized to the OMOP CDM. The study was open to all data partners in the EHDEN network, including EHDEN consortium members.
In the end, 32 EHDEN data partners participated in the study contributing results from 41 data sources from 18 European countries (including Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Türkiye, UK) and 3 data sources from the United States (not part of the EHDEN network but provided by the EFPIA partners). (Figure 1)
The contributing data sources originated from different health care settings and comprised various types of real-world data including electronic medical records (primary and secondary care), administrative claims, and disease registries. A brief description of all included databases is provided in the Annex I, and the table with the acronyms is available in Supplementary table 1.
Study setup
The study was set up as a federated network study. Each data partner accessed and analysed their respective databases locally. Before study initiation, test runs of the analytics were performed on all data sources as a feasibility step: to participate it was required to have at least one drug of interest recorded in more than 100 individuals within the study period. Only after passing the feasibility step successfully, data partners were permitted to execute the final analytical package against their participating data sources. (Figure 1)
Study period
The study period covered the years from 2010 to the latest data collection date for each data source.
Study population
The study cohort comprised all individuals present in each database during the study period with at least 365 days of data availability before the day they become eligible for study inclusion. This requirement of at least 365 days of data history was not held for children < 1 year old. Additional eligibility criteria were applied for the calculation of incidence rates, where the observation time of users of the medicine of interest was excluded during use and 30 days afterwards as a wash out period.
Variables
The list of the drugs under study was drawn from the EMA shortages catalogue during the period under study.7 We included all those medicines listed as had been an ongoing shortage for at least 365 days (cut-off date was September 25th, 2023): agalsidase_beta, alteplase, amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, arsenic_trioxide, belatacept, c1_esterase_inhibitor, ceftozolane-tazobactam, cetrorelix, cytarabine_liposomal, ganirelix, imiglucerase, sarilumab, tenecteplase, tigecycline, tocilizumab, varenicline and verteporfin.
The list of the alternative drugs which could be prescribed to replace drugs in shortage was drawn either directly from suggestions made by the EMA or by using the ATC group the medicine was in or based on recommendations either from treatment guidelines or from domain experts, which included a total of 39.
The final list of drugs included 13 antibiotics, 7 cancer treatments, 3 eye health treatments, 2 smoking cessation treatments, 22 rare disease medications, 3 thrombolytic agents, 2 assisted reproduction treatments and 5 transplant medications. An exhaustive list of all the drugs included considered is available in the Supplementary table 2.
Statistical analysis
All databases had to pass an initial feasibility check before being included in the study to ensure the minimum requirements to participate (described in Study setup section). We assessed patient baseline characteristics in a large-scale characterization study focusing on demographic characteristics (age, sex) and conditions recorded prior to exposure. This characterization was carried out using the same settings across all the participating databases.
Period prevalence was calculated by calendar year, defined as the total number of individuals receiving the drug of interest during the given period (i.e., calendar year) divided by the population at risk of being exposed during the same period. Prevalence estimates were supplemented with 95% binomial confidence intervals. Annual incidence rates of the medicines of interest were calculated as the number of new users after 30 days of no use divided by the time at risk of getting exposed during that period. Incidence rates will be given together with 95% Poisson confidence intervals. Incidence was evaluated in terms of annual incidence rates, that is, the number of new users (30 days of no drug use) divided by the time at risk of getting exposed during that period. Point estimates were supplemented with 95% Poisson confidence intervals. We also performed stratified analyses based on the following settings:
Period: We considered stratified analyses based on the calendar year for medicines being listed as (suggested) shortages and their alternatives. When calendar year stratifications did not allow the observation of changes once shortage was declared, monthly or quarterly periods were considered.
Healthcare setting: We considered stratified analyses based on healthcare settings, that is, primary versus secondary care (if both are included) and data types, that is, claims versus electronic health records versus registry data.
Demographic characteristics: We considered stratified analyses based on age bands, that is, younger than 18 versus between 18 and 64 versus older than 65 years old, and sex, that is male versus female patients.
Incidence and prevalence analyses were executed across all participating databases using the IncidencePrevalence R-package, part of the DARWIN EU® open-source software library.
In post-hoc analyses, we assessed the average incidence and prevalence during 3 years after the shortage to during 3 years before the announced shortage. A use of < 67% after the announced shortage (i.e. a drop of >33% in use) was considered that the medicine was in shortage in the particular database, health care setting or country. 15, 16
Results interpretation
A full-day webinar was conducted, bringing together medical experts, epidemiologists, and data scientists from all EHDEN data partners who contributed to the study. The incidence and prevalence results were visualized in an R shiny application and presented in a plenary session using one drug group as an example, followed by breakout sessions for each of the 11 drug groups to collaboratively analyse and interpret the results, and to document and summarize the tentative conclusions and limitations. The results were analysed per database and stratified by health care setting, age group, sex and country, taken into account all available information from the literature and local health care practice on time windows and potential reasons for drug shortages during the study period.
Results
In this large network cohort study, 92 databases expressed interest to join, 67 databases attempted the feasibility stage, of which 63 databases passed, whilst one did not pass feasibility because they did not have any drug of interest, and three could not execute the code due to problems of compatibility between the study package and the database management system. Finally, two of the databases that passed the feasibility withdrew at that stage, and one was also available from another data partner and therefore excluded.
Of those remaining 60 databases that had passed feasibility, 47 successfully ran the incidence prevalence step, however, six of them were not included in this article as they did not obtain the data sharing approval on time. Thus, the final number of databased presented in this article is 41. However, this is an ongoing work, and more databases along with the characterisation of users will be included in the future. (Figure 1)
Drugs with suggested shortage
From the 18 drugs with an announced shortage date, we detected a ≥33% drop in the incidence (post-announcement versus pre-announcement) of use of 12 drugs, whilst ≥33% drop in the prevalence was observed among 4 drugs.
Varenicline was the drug with the larger number of countries with a ≥33% drop in incidence (8 countries), followed by cetrorelix (3 countries). However, the drug with the largest number of countries dropping their prevalence over ≥33% was amoxicillin (9 countries) followed by amoxicillin-clavulanate (8 countries), and varenicline (7 countries). (Figure 2A)
These shortages were present in 11 of the 17 European countries included in the study as well as in the US. The countries with the highest number of detected shortages identified based on incidence and/or prevalence were the UK and Spain, with 5 medicines in shortage each, followed by Germany and the US with 4 each. (Figure 2B and 2C, and Supplementary table 3)
When we take into account the total number of drugs with suggested shortages that were observed in each country, 71% (5 out of 7 drugs) had a ≥33% incidence drop in the UK, followed by the Netherlands with a 33% (3 out of 9) drugs affected. Regarding drops in prevalence, Italy (67%, 2 out of 3) and Belgium (60%, with 3 out of 5 drugs) were the ones with the highest proportion of drugs with shortage. (Figure 3)
A sensitivity analysis with a cut off of 20% (instead of 33%) drop in incidence would detect up to 15 drugs, including additional ones: agalsidase beta, arsenic trioxide and verteporfin. A similar sensitivity analysis based on a ≥20% drop in prevalence would detect the same 4 drugs as the 33% threshold. (Supplementary figure 1, supplementary table 4)
Drugs that were more frequently in shortage and its alternatives
The following sections are focused on the drugs that were more frequently in shortage in the databases of the study. The complete results for incidence and prevalence, including all the drugs and its alternatives, are avaliable in a shiny app: https://dpa-pde-oxford.shinyapps.io/MegaStudy_webinar_incprev_BG1/.
Smoking cessation treatments
Shortage of varenicline was announced the 8th of July 2021 by the EMA. In primary care databases, incidence of varenicline and its alternative, nicotine supplements, generally decreased over time (with the exception of an incident peak in 2020-2021 for varenicline use observed in SIDIAP and THIN Belgium; and increased use of nicotine in THIN France since 2015 and for the last two values of OPCRD). (Figure 4A) In secondary care, incidence of varenicline decreased after 2019. Conversely, its alternative (nicotine) increased. (Figure 4B) In the remaining databases, the decrease in incidence of varenicline can be observed from 2017-2018. (Figure 4C)
Claims databases contain records from primary and secondary care data. Secondary care databases shown are all hospitals.
A) Primary care databases
B) Secondary care databases
C) Other types of databases: containing primary and secondary care combined
When observing prevalence of varenicline, similar patterns of use were observed in all databases. However, Turku, a hospital without incidence results, showed an increment in the prevalence of varenicline use. (Figure 5)
Claims databases contain records from primary and secondary care data. Secondary care databases shown are all hospitals.
A) Primary care databases
B) Secondary care databases
C) Other types of databases: containing primary and secondary care combined
Assisted Reproduction treatments
Shortage of ganirelix was announced the 16th of February 2017 by the EMA, and considered resolved the 8th of November 2022. Meanwhile, shortage of cetrorelix was announced the 10th of August 2022, and considered resolved the 15th of February 2023. Since shortage of cetrorelix was shorter than a year, this drug was included in the study as the alternative of ganirelix. However, cetrorelix was the top two drug with number of countries with a ≥33% drop in incidence (Figure 2). Figure 6 reports the incidence of ganirelix and cetrorelix among women.
Claims databases contain records from primary and secondary care data. Secondary care databases shown are all hospitals.
A) Primary care databases
B) Secondary care databases
C) Other types of databases: containing primary and secondary care combined
In primary care, incidence of ganirelix in women show a decrease in IPCI from 2011 to 2016, whilst SIDIAP had a drop between 2012 to 2014, both databases show incidence recovered after. IPCI show an increase in cetrorelix use when incidence of ganirelix was at its lowest (2017). Additionally, incidence of cetrorelix dropped twice in SIDIAP, between 2011-2012 and after 2017, and THIN ES show a drop in the incidence of cetrorelix between 2019 to 2021. (Figure 6A)
In secondary care settings, use of ganirelix and/or cetrorelix in women was observed in 5 hospitals (Figure 6B). Incidence of ganirelix increased in 3 databases while the other 2 hospitals presented either no use (SUCD) or one single estimate (IMASIS). Incidence of cetrorelix in women could be observed in three hospitals: SUCD show no incident use between 2012 and 2019, followed by an increase in 2020 and 2021; its incidence decreased in IMASIS, whilst it increased between 2012 and 2017, followed by a decrease in HUS.
In the remaining databases (those containing both primary and secondary care information) incidence of ganirelix in women presented a slight decrease in 2018 in 3 out of 5 databases. In the other two, MAITT presented a decrease in its incidence between 2012 and 2018 (with an upsurge in 2015), followed by a stop after 2018; conversely, incidence of ganirelix in Scifi-perl increased since its first estimate observed in 2018. (Figure 6C)
Common infection antibiotics
Shortage of amoxicillin alone and in combination with clavulanate was announced by the EMA the 27th of January 2023.
Prevalence of amoxicillin alone and in combination with clavulanate generally decreased in the observed primary care databases, but all of them showed a marked drop in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. Seven out of 11 primary care data bases show an upsurge in 2022 that partially recovered values before the pandemic onset, however, estimates in 2023 decreased again. (Figure 7A).
Claims databases contain records from primary and secondary care data. Secondary care databases shown are all hospitals.
A) Primary care databases
B) Secondary care databases
C) Other types of databases: containing primary and secondary care combined
Six hospitals out of 13 did not show any prevalent use of amoxicillin-clavulanate but had a prevalent use of amoxicillin alone. (Figure 7B) Prevalent use of amoxicillin-clavulanate increased between 2020-2022, after the Covid-19 pandemic onset, in 3 out of 8 hospitals, whilst for amoxicillin alone was in 7 out of 11 hospitals.
Prevalence of amoxicillin alone or combined with clavulanate in the other databases also presented a decrease in its use, except in Hulafe and amoxicillin-clavulanate in MAITT. (Figure 7C).
When the alternative antibiotics used for common infections are observed, prevalence of azithromycin increased in 6 out of 11 primary care databases, but also presented a drop in 2020-2021, whilst clarithromycin decreased in 10 out of 11. Similar decreasing trends can be observed in penicillin V. Additionally, prevalence of penicillin G was very low in primary care, with values lower than 0.1%. In secondary care, prevalence of azithromycin increased in 13 out of 14, clarithromycin presented a generally stable trend (in 9 out of 12), penicillin V was only observed in 2 databases out of the 14, and penicillin G presented prevalence of <0.2% except in HUS that increased from 2010 to 2023 (maximum observed prevalence of 1.3%). In the other types of databases, azithromycin decreased in 9 out of 11, with a small upsurge in 2022 in 6 of them; whilst clarithromycin and penicillin V prevalence generally decreased over time. Supplementary figure 2 contains the prevalence of alternative antibiotics for common infections.
Discussion
Our study contains information in the use of 57 drugs across 41 databases that were mapped to the OMOP-CDM.13 To our knowledge, this is the largest network cohort study conducted to date, and the most comprehensive analysis of drug shortages internationally.
We studied drug shortages as defined by a drop in incidence or prevalence of use of ≥33 across different countries, as based on previous research.15, 16 In these analyses, varenicline showed a decline in both incidence and prevalence: in June 2021, batches of Champix (varenicline commercialised by Pfizer) were found to contain levels of N-nitroso-varenicline exceeding acceptable EU limits. This led to the recall of several batches, and a subsequent pause in production 3 months later, which resulted in a shortage of the medication affecting the UK, the US and all EU member states except Bulgaria.17, 18 Despite a shortage of the selected alternative was never announced, we did not observe an increase in nicotine use but a surprising decrease.
Both cetrorelix and ganirelix are used for preventing premature ovulation when women are undergoing an ovarian stimulation.19 Problems with the manufacturing of these, independent for each drug, led to shortages of both products between August and November 2022, affecting many of the EU countries.7 In our data, the shortage of cetrorelix was seen as an incidence drop in more countries than that of ganirelix.
Finally, amoxicillin and amoxicillin-clavulanate are antibiotics widely used for common infections.20 Shortage of amoxicillin and amoxicillin-clavulanate were caused by issues in the manufacturing plus an increase in the demand. The combination Amoxicillin-clavulanate was used especially at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic to treat secondary bacterial infections such as pneumonia, at a time when no evidence of risk-benefit of COVID-19 treatments were yet available.21 Additionally, subsequent decreases in the use of amoxicillin (alone or with clavulanate), as well as of alternative antibiotics, during the Covid-19 pandemic could be attributed to the impact of public health restrictions on non-Covid infections, and to a reduced interaction with the health services.22 Additionally, an upsurge of respiratory infections that especially effected the UK took place during winter 2022, which also contributed to the increase in demand that led to the announcement of the shortage in January 2023.23 Since it was announced in January 2023, the study period covering the after the shortage was announced in most databases was short. However, we successfully detected the 33% drop using the prevalence estimates.
Prior efforts in detecting shortages using trends of use in the US suggested a 33% drop was an accurate definition of drug shortages.23 We explored the 33% cutoff and a 20% cutoff. The 20% cutoff increased the number of drugs with shortages, and the countries involved, when applied to the change in the incidence rates; whist only impacted in the number of countries involved in the prevalence estimates.
Strengths and limitations of this study
Our study contains a large number of databases from different health care settings and countries, which provides a global picture of the state of drug use and shortages in Europe. Moreover, and thanks to the implementation of the OMOP-CDM and the standard analytics, all databases run the same analytical code, improving the robustness and reliability of the results.13 In the same line, the code is fully available in GitHub, which provides full transparency.
However, we must acknowledge some limitations of the study.
Several drugs decreased in incidence and prevalence in 2020, after the COVID-19 pandemic onset, due to a global reduction in the diagnosis and prescriptions. However, some drugs showed an increment after 2021 that could be a rebound effect of health systems trying to catch up with the missing diagnostics and delayed treatments, or in case of short-term drugs as antibiotics, due to an upsurge of respiratory infections. This can have an impact when calculating the difference in incidence and prevalence 3 years before and after the shortage was announced.
Last data points observed in the databases may not contain the full year and therefore the last value may be biased. Moreover, our results mostly rely on prescription rather than dispensation data. Doctors may have been prescribing unavailable drugs, which may result in a lag in the reduction of use (until the doctor switched to prescribe the available alternative) or as an overestimate incidence or prevalence when the shortage was active. Additionally, and as previously mentioned, some of the alternative medicines like nicotine are available over the counter, leading to an underestimation in incidence and prevalence in our data.
Conclusions
Detection of shortages using incidence and prevalence estimates can be challenging. Federated network analysis provides an opportunity to obtain large amount of information that is representative for several countries and care settings, which can help in the fight against drug shortages.
Data Availability
All data sources were previously mapped to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDMv5). Thus, only aggregated data was shared by each of the data partners. Aggregated data is fully available in the shiny app of the study: https://dpa-pde-oxford.shinyapps.io/MegaStudy_webinar_incprev_BG1/. Access to patient level data are specific to each database and must be requested individually to each data source. Code of the study is fully available in GitHub: https://github.com/oxford-pharmacoepi/MegaStudy
https://github.com/oxford-pharmacoepi/MegaStudy
https://dpa-pde-oxford.shinyapps.io/MegaStudy_webinar_incprev_BG1/
Authors’ roles
Conceptualisation: TB, MPM, DPA, PR. Formal analysis: TB, MPM. Execution of the code: all authors who contributed with data. Funding acquisition: PR, DPA. Data interpretation all authors. Writing original draft: MPM, TB, SS, PN, AR, KM, FSS, NR, AR, EF, JR, PP, MAM, LM, MF, AL, CL, AM, SR, LK, RC, SC, DP, EB, BP. Writing review and editing: all authors. Approving final version of manuscript: all authors.
Funding
This project has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (JU) under grant agreement No 806968. The JU receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA.
Conflicts of interest
AMR declares consulting and/or speaking from Abbvie, Amgen; Research grant from Novartis, Pfizer, Amgen. APU has received consultancy fees from Synapse Partners unrelated to the work. CDK is a full-time employee of Bayer AG. CG declares consulting and/or speaking from AstraZeneca, Bayer, BIAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, MSD, Novartis and& Novo& Nordisk. CT holds shares and is an employee at Roche Pharmaceuticals. DBP has advisory board membership with AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Viatris, Teva Pharmaceuticals; consultancy agreements with AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Viatris, Teva Pharmaceuticals; grants and unrestricted funding for investigator-initiated studies (conducted through Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute Pte Ltd) from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Viatris, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi Genzyme, and UK National Health Service; payment for lectures/speaking engagements from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, Inside Practice, GlaxoSmithKline, Medscape, Viatris, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi Genzyme, Teva Pharmaceuticals; payment for travel/accommodation/meeting expenses from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Medscape, Teva Pharmaceuticals.; owns 74% of the social enterprise Optimum Patient Care Ltd (Australia and UK) and 92.61% of Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute Pte Ltd (Singapore); is peer reviewer for grant committees of the UK Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, and Health Technology Assessment; and was an expert witness for GlaxoSmithKline. EB owns Pfizer Shares. EHT received consultancy fees from Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, outside the submitted work. FN owns some AstraZeneca shares. GC is a full-time employee of Bayer AG. KM is a full time employee of Bayer AG. MT has received consulting fees from Health Canada and CDA. PR works for a research group that receives/received unconditional research grants from Chiese, GSK, UCB, Amgen, Johnson and Johnson, European Medicines Agency, none of which relate the content of this manuscript. TB declares consultant for IBSA. DPA’s research group has received grant/s from Amgen, Chiesi-Taylor, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB Biopharma. His research group has received consultancy fees from Astra Zeneca and UCB Biopharma. Amgen, Astellas, Janssen, Synapse Management Partners and UCB Biopharma have funded or supported training programmes organised by DPA’s department.
The remaining authors had nothing to be disclosed.
Ethical approval
All data partners received IRB approval or waiver in accordance with their institutional governance guidelines, which were collected by study coordinator. This included: Use of Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data for this study was approved via the Research Data Governance (RDG) Process of the UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (protocol 23_003389). Ethical approval for Fundación para la Investigación del Hospital Universitario La Fe de la Comunidad Valenciana (HULAFE) was obtained from the Comité de ética de la investigación con medicamentos (number 2024-561-1). Ethical approval for IMIM-Hospital del Mar Barcelona (IMASIS) was obtained by the Parc de Salut Mar Research Ethics Committee CEIm-Parc de Salut Mar (number 2023/11266). Ethical approval number for Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa (HUS) in this study was HUS/325/2023. Ethical approval number for Istanbul University (ITF) was 2302692. Ethical approval number for Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (NCR) was K23.338. Ethical approval number for University Medicine Dresden (UM DRESDEN) was SR-EK-181052024. Ethical approval number for Optimum Patient Care Limited (OPCRD) was ADEPT0624. Ethical approval number for Clinical-hospital center Zvezdara (CHCZ) was FWA00024180. Ethical approval number for Fundació Institut d’Investigació Sanitària Illes Balears (PRISIB) was CI-866-24. Ethical approval number for EGAS MONIZ HEALTH ALLIANCE (EMHA ULSRA and EMHA ULSGE) was 4/2023 Ref 19-CE-ICVS/CAC-EMHA. Ethical approval number for FISABIO-HSRU (VID-CONSIGN) was 2023/382. Ethical approval number for University Hospital Antwerp (UZA) was 5957-EDGE 3372-BUN. Ethical approval number for AZ Groeninge (AZGR) was AZGD2024008. Ethical approval number for Viecuri was 2022_088. Ethical approval number for Charité - Universitätsmedizin (CHA CAN) was EA1/04124. Ethical approval number for THIN databases was 2024-06-R. Ethical approval for The Integrated Primary Care Information Project (IPCI) was obtained by the Integrated Primary Care Information review board (registration number 9/2023).
The remaining databases needed no approval for use of pseudo anonymised secondary data.
Data sharing
All data sources were previously mapped to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDMv5). Thus, only aggregated data was shared by each of the data partners. Aggregated data is fully available in the shiny app of the study: https://dpa-pde-oxford.shinyapps.io/MegaStudy_webinar_incprev_BG1/. Access to patient level data are specific to each database and must be requested individually to each data source. Code of the study is fully available in GitHub: https://github.com/oxford-pharmacoepi/MegaStudy
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge the immense effort and commitment of the EHDEN data partners, without whom this study would not have been possible. We also thank Montse Camprubi for her support coordinating the study.
References
