Summary
Hypertension poses a significant global health challenge, and its management is often complicated by the complexity of treatment strategies involving multiple drug combinations and the need to consider multiple outcomes. Traditional treatment effect estimation (TEE) methods struggle to address this complexity, as they typically focus on binary treatments and binary outcomes. To overcome these limitations, we introduce METO, a novel framework designed for TEE in the context of multiple drug combinations and multiple outcomes. METO employs a multi-treatment encoding mechanism to handle multiple drug combinations and their sequences effectively, and differentiates between effectiveness and safety outcomes by explicitly learning the outcome type when predicting the treatment outcomes. Furthermore, to address confounding bias in outcome prediction, we employ an inverse probability weighting method tailored for multiple treatments, assigning each patient a balance weight derived from their propensity score against different drug combinations. Our comprehensive evaluation using a real-world patient dataset demonstrates that METO outperforms existing TEE methods, with an average improvement of 5.0% in area under the precisionrecall curve and 6.4% in influence function-based precision of estimating heterogeneous effects. A case study demonstrates that our method successfully identifies personalized optimal antihypertensive dual regimens, achieving maximal efficacy and minimal drug-related safety risks. This showcases its potential for improving treatment strategies and outcomes in hypertension management.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was funded in part by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under award number R01GM141279. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
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 observational data used in the paper is from the MarketScan Research Database, which is fully Health HIPAA-compliant de-identified and has very minimal risk of the potential for loss of privacy. Our research protocol has been determined by The Office of Responsible Research Practices at The Ohio State University for IRB Exemption under the study 2023E0357.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data we use is from MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) and includes approximately 130 million patients from 2012 to 2021. Access to the MarketScan data analyzed in this manuscript is provided by The Ohio State University. The dataset is available at https://www.merative.com/real-world-evidence.
