Michael Webster-Clark, Yi Li, Sophie Dell'Aniello, Robert W Platt
Background: Clone-censor-weighting (CCW) can compare treatment regimens that are initially indistinguishable (such as starting treatment within specific time windows) without using landmarks or creating immortal time. The causal contrasts estimated in these cases and the analyses themselves can become quite complex; however.
Objective: Provide a tutorial on CCW for comparing initiation windows and illustrate the causal contrasts underlying such comparisons.
Methods: We identified patients with myocardial infarctions without past aspirin or clopidogrel use in Medicare's synthetic public data files. We assigned "clones" to three regimens: (1) initiation within 30 days; (2) initiation within 90 days; or 3) initiation from 30 to 90 days. Clones were censored when deviating from their assigned regimen by failing to initiate treatment in time or by initiating treatment too early. We addressed informative censoring using inverse probability of censoring weights (IPCW), calculated weighted 180-day risks of re-hospitalization or death using Kaplan-Meier methods, and visualized the portion of the population exposed during the first 90 days to compare exposure distributions underlying regimens.
Results: We identified 1589 patients experiencing myocardial infarction with no past medication use. 15% initiated within 30 days and 26% initiated between 30 and 90 days. After IPCW, the 180-day outcome risk was 40.2% in the 30-day regimen, 35.7% in the 90-day regimen, and 35.2% in the 30-to-90 day regimen.
Conclusions: Though CCW can be complex to implement and the effects it estimates can vary substantially across study populations that initiate treatments at different times, it is a useful tool for contrasting initiation windows.
{"title":"Demystifying Clone-Censor-Weighting to Studying Treatment Initiation Windows: An Example Using Publicly Available Synthetic Medicare Claims Data.","authors":"Michael Webster-Clark, Yi Li, Sophie Dell'Aniello, Robert W Platt","doi":"10.1002/pds.70223","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70223","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clone-censor-weighting (CCW) can compare treatment regimens that are initially indistinguishable (such as starting treatment within specific time windows) without using landmarks or creating immortal time. The causal contrasts estimated in these cases and the analyses themselves can become quite complex; however.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Provide a tutorial on CCW for comparing initiation windows and illustrate the causal contrasts underlying such comparisons.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified patients with myocardial infarctions without past aspirin or clopidogrel use in Medicare's synthetic public data files. We assigned \"clones\" to three regimens: (1) initiation within 30 days; (2) initiation within 90 days; or 3) initiation from 30 to 90 days. Clones were censored when deviating from their assigned regimen by failing to initiate treatment in time or by initiating treatment too early. We addressed informative censoring using inverse probability of censoring weights (IPCW), calculated weighted 180-day risks of re-hospitalization or death using Kaplan-Meier methods, and visualized the portion of the population exposed during the first 90 days to compare exposure distributions underlying regimens.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 1589 patients experiencing myocardial infarction with no past medication use. 15% initiated within 30 days and 26% initiated between 30 and 90 days. After IPCW, the 180-day outcome risk was 40.2% in the 30-day regimen, 35.7% in the 90-day regimen, and 35.2% in the 30-to-90 day regimen.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Though CCW can be complex to implement and the effects it estimates can vary substantially across study populations that initiate treatments at different times, it is a useful tool for contrasting initiation windows.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70223"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12450615/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145113575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
G Niklas Norén, Katherine Donegan, Monica A Muñoz, Thamir M Alshammari, Nicole Pratt, Gianmario Candore, Daniel Morales, Peter Rijnbeek, Andrew Bate, Rodrigo Postigo, Sengwee Toh, Gianluca Trifirò, Montse Soriano Gabarro, Alison Cave, Patrick B Ryan
Introduction: Despite substantial investments in analytical infrastructure and scientific research related to the development and analysis of real-world evidence in support of signal management, the impact on routine pharmacovigilance activities has been limited. Most organizations still rely largely on analyses of individual case reports and pre-existing evidence - especially during signal detection and validation.
Objective: This paper presents a set of recommendations for efforts to enable broader use of real-world evidence throughout pharmacovigilance signal management, in the future.
Outcome: The recommendations regard streamlined data access, data harmonization and use of reproducible analytical workflows to enable rapid and robust evidence generation. They emphasize the need for cross-disciplinary collaboration and for organizational adaptations to ensure adequate competence and supporting processes, including principles for how to integrate new types of evidence in decision-making. The execution of pilot studies under realistic conditions and the dissemination of their findings are highlighted as important steps toward defining the proposed change and driving progress in this area. This manuscript is endorsed by the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE).
{"title":"Recommendations to Enable Broader Use of Real-World Evidence to Inform Decision-Making Throughout Pharmacovigilance Signal Management.","authors":"G Niklas Norén, Katherine Donegan, Monica A Muñoz, Thamir M Alshammari, Nicole Pratt, Gianmario Candore, Daniel Morales, Peter Rijnbeek, Andrew Bate, Rodrigo Postigo, Sengwee Toh, Gianluca Trifirò, Montse Soriano Gabarro, Alison Cave, Patrick B Ryan","doi":"10.1002/pds.70231","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70231","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite substantial investments in analytical infrastructure and scientific research related to the development and analysis of real-world evidence in support of signal management, the impact on routine pharmacovigilance activities has been limited. Most organizations still rely largely on analyses of individual case reports and pre-existing evidence - especially during signal detection and validation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This paper presents a set of recommendations for efforts to enable broader use of real-world evidence throughout pharmacovigilance signal management, in the future.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>The recommendations regard streamlined data access, data harmonization and use of reproducible analytical workflows to enable rapid and robust evidence generation. They emphasize the need for cross-disciplinary collaboration and for organizational adaptations to ensure adequate competence and supporting processes, including principles for how to integrate new types of evidence in decision-making. The execution of pilot studies under realistic conditions and the dissemination of their findings are highlighted as important steps toward defining the proposed change and driving progress in this area. This manuscript is endorsed by the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE).</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70231"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12508715/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145252297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ami Vyas, Shweta Kamat, Sadie Thomas, Connor Gambino, Britny R Brown, Amit D Raval
Background: Research using real-world databases (RWD) often requires the development of computable phenotypes based on clinical reasoning-based algorithms or prediction models with validation through a reference standard such as chart review. While there are studies reporting different phenotypes for key prostate cancer (PC) disease or outcomes, these have not been summarized systematically.
Objectives: To conduct a systematic review (SR) to summarize validation statistics on PC-specific phenotypes, including metastasis, biochemical recurrence (BCR), castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC), progression-free survival, and performance status.
Methods: We conducted a SR in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed/Medline and EMBASE for studies reporting algorithms and prediction models for PC phenotypes based on structured RWD published between 2012 and 2024. A summary of algorithms and prediction models, along with their respective estimates of diagnostic accuracy compared to reference standards and/or measures of uncertainty, was provided. An area under the curve (AUC) > 0.7 was considered an acceptable phenotype.
Results: Out of 7427 retrieved citations, 29 unique retrospective studies (31 citations) were included. Both claims-based codes and prediction model-based classification for any metastasis and bone metastases had an acceptable performance with high AUC (0.88 and > 0.7, respectively) and high specificity (above 90%) with a few having moderate sensitivity (60% to 100%). The prediction model-based BCR classification had acceptable performance (AUC > 0.7); however, claims-based BCR had moderate performance statistics with sensitivity in the range of 3%-19% and specificity in the range of 83%-98%. One claims-based algorithm for metastatic CRPC had high sensitivity (77%) and specificity (100%). Studies for mHSPC were based on clinical reasoning without assessing their diagnostic accuracy. Claims-based algorithms for performance status had at least 75% sensitivity and relatively high specificity.
Conclusions: Our SR highlights the acceptable accuracy of computable phenotypes for PC, including (bone) metastasis, BCR, and performance status within RWD. Further validation studies are needed for RWD-based phenotypes to account for changes in therapeutic options in PC.
{"title":"Diagnostic Performance of Prostate Cancer Disease-Specific Phenotypes Identified Using Real-World Databases: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Ami Vyas, Shweta Kamat, Sadie Thomas, Connor Gambino, Britny R Brown, Amit D Raval","doi":"10.1002/pds.70236","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70236","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Research using real-world databases (RWD) often requires the development of computable phenotypes based on clinical reasoning-based algorithms or prediction models with validation through a reference standard such as chart review. While there are studies reporting different phenotypes for key prostate cancer (PC) disease or outcomes, these have not been summarized systematically.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To conduct a systematic review (SR) to summarize validation statistics on PC-specific phenotypes, including metastasis, biochemical recurrence (BCR), castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC), progression-free survival, and performance status.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a SR in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed/Medline and EMBASE for studies reporting algorithms and prediction models for PC phenotypes based on structured RWD published between 2012 and 2024. A summary of algorithms and prediction models, along with their respective estimates of diagnostic accuracy compared to reference standards and/or measures of uncertainty, was provided. An area under the curve (AUC) > 0.7 was considered an acceptable phenotype.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 7427 retrieved citations, 29 unique retrospective studies (31 citations) were included. Both claims-based codes and prediction model-based classification for any metastasis and bone metastases had an acceptable performance with high AUC (0.88 and > 0.7, respectively) and high specificity (above 90%) with a few having moderate sensitivity (60% to 100%). The prediction model-based BCR classification had acceptable performance (AUC > 0.7); however, claims-based BCR had moderate performance statistics with sensitivity in the range of 3%-19% and specificity in the range of 83%-98%. One claims-based algorithm for metastatic CRPC had high sensitivity (77%) and specificity (100%). Studies for mHSPC were based on clinical reasoning without assessing their diagnostic accuracy. Claims-based algorithms for performance status had at least 75% sensitivity and relatively high specificity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our SR highlights the acceptable accuracy of computable phenotypes for PC, including (bone) metastasis, BCR, and performance status within RWD. Further validation studies are needed for RWD-based phenotypes to account for changes in therapeutic options in PC.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70236"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12527646/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145302488","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sabrina Giometto, Andrea Spini, Giorgia Pellegrini, Ylenia Ingrasciotta, Chiara Bellitto, Federica Soardo, Luca L'Abbate, Olivia Leoni, Arianna Mazzone, Domenica Ancona, Paolo Stella, Anna Cavazzana, Angela Scapin, Sara Lopes, Valeria Belleudi, Stefano Ledda, Paolo Carta, Paola Rossi, Lucian Ejlli, Ester Sapigni, Aurora Puccini, Alessandra Allotta, Sebastiano Addario Pollina, Roberto Da Cas, Giampaolo Bucaneve, Antea Maria Pia Mangano, Francesco Balducci, Carla Sorrentino, Ilenia Senesi, Marco Tuccori, Rosa Gini, Stefania Spila Alegiani, Marco Massari, Gianluca Trifirò, Ersilia Lucenteforte
This study aimed to identify and describe trajectories of adherence to biologics in patients with IBDs and to identify adherence determinants in the Italian real-world setting. We conducted a retrospective cohort study across 12 Italian regions, including new users of biologics with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), between 2010 and 2019 and followed them for 3 years. We assessed adherence longitudinally, and we identified trajectories using nonparametric methods. To identify determinants of adherence, we used multinomial multivariate regression models. We included 20 150 subjects in the final cohort, mostly male (56%), < 65 years old (92%), and with Crohn's disease (58%). We identified three trajectories of adherence to biologics for IBDs: one group (19% of the cohort) maintained high adherence throughout the observation period, while the largest group (46%) initially reduced adherence, stabilizing around 70%. The remaining group (35%) gradually decreased adherence over the entire follow-up, reaching 20%. Being female (odds ratio (OR) 1.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40-1.65), older (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.21-1.70), and having adalimumab as index drug were each positively associated with low adherence compared to high adherence. In contrast, starting treatment with a biosimilar (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.42-0.52) was negatively associated with low adherence. Our findings highlight that one in three patients with IBDs gradually reduced adherence to biologics within the first 3 years of treatment. Differences were observed according to the initial biologic dispensed and patient characteristics such as sex and age, with females and older patients positively associated with low adherence.
{"title":"Trajectories of Adherence to Biologics in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Large-Scale Multi-Regional Italian Study Through the VALORE Distributed Database.","authors":"Sabrina Giometto, Andrea Spini, Giorgia Pellegrini, Ylenia Ingrasciotta, Chiara Bellitto, Federica Soardo, Luca L'Abbate, Olivia Leoni, Arianna Mazzone, Domenica Ancona, Paolo Stella, Anna Cavazzana, Angela Scapin, Sara Lopes, Valeria Belleudi, Stefano Ledda, Paolo Carta, Paola Rossi, Lucian Ejlli, Ester Sapigni, Aurora Puccini, Alessandra Allotta, Sebastiano Addario Pollina, Roberto Da Cas, Giampaolo Bucaneve, Antea Maria Pia Mangano, Francesco Balducci, Carla Sorrentino, Ilenia Senesi, Marco Tuccori, Rosa Gini, Stefania Spila Alegiani, Marco Massari, Gianluca Trifirò, Ersilia Lucenteforte","doi":"10.1002/pds.70230","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70230","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to identify and describe trajectories of adherence to biologics in patients with IBDs and to identify adherence determinants in the Italian real-world setting. We conducted a retrospective cohort study across 12 Italian regions, including new users of biologics with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), between 2010 and 2019 and followed them for 3 years. We assessed adherence longitudinally, and we identified trajectories using nonparametric methods. To identify determinants of adherence, we used multinomial multivariate regression models. We included 20 150 subjects in the final cohort, mostly male (56%), < 65 years old (92%), and with Crohn's disease (58%). We identified three trajectories of adherence to biologics for IBDs: one group (19% of the cohort) maintained high adherence throughout the observation period, while the largest group (46%) initially reduced adherence, stabilizing around 70%. The remaining group (35%) gradually decreased adherence over the entire follow-up, reaching 20%. Being female (odds ratio (OR) 1.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40-1.65), older (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.21-1.70), and having adalimumab as index drug were each positively associated with low adherence compared to high adherence. In contrast, starting treatment with a biosimilar (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.42-0.52) was negatively associated with low adherence. Our findings highlight that one in three patients with IBDs gradually reduced adherence to biologics within the first 3 years of treatment. Differences were observed according to the initial biologic dispensed and patient characteristics such as sex and age, with females and older patients positively associated with low adherence.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70230"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12511659/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145258812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nathaniel Hendrix, Esther E Velásquez, Harry Pham, Andrew Bazemore
<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Large telehealth companies and smaller aesthetic medicine providers used compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide to meet consumer demand for these drugs during their shortages. In this study, we estimate the documentation rate of compounded formulations of these drugs in the US primary care and characterize differences between users of compounded and brand-name formulations of these drugs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the American Family Cohort, a nationwide US database of electronic health records from primary care practices, spanning January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2024. Patients with documented semaglutide and/or tirzepatide use were included. Brand-name drug prescriptions were identified from structured data; compounded formulation use was identified from clinical notes. Outcomes included the proportion of patients using compounded formulations and their characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 153 044 included patients (64.0% female, mean age 55.0 years), 8.2% used compounded formulations, which made up an increasing share of semaglutide and tirzepatide use over time. Users of compounded formulations had longer mean therapy durations (compounded only: 10.0 months vs. brand-name only: 7.8 months) and were more likely to be female, non-Hispanic White, nondiabetic, and to live in areas of lower socioeconomic deprivation compared to patients who used only brand-name drugs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Between January 2021 and December 2024, documentation of compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide use in US primary care settings appeared lower than surveys reporting that approximately 23% of patients using these medications received them from compounders. This suggests that many patients may access these medications outside of coordinated care.</p><p><strong>Plain language summary: </strong>During drug shortages from 2022 to 2024, many patients turned to compounded formulations of popular weight-loss medications semaglutide (Ozempic/Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro/Zepbound) made by specialty pharmacies. We analyzed medical records from over 153 000 patients across the United States who used these medications to understand how often primary care doctors knew their patients were using compounded formulations. We found that only 8.3% of patients had documented use of compounded formulations in their medical records, far lower than previous surveys suggesting 23% of users get these medications from nontraditional sources like telehealth companies or aesthetic clinics. Patients using compounded formulations were more likely to be white, female, nondiabetic, and live in wealthier areas compared to those using brand-name versions. They also used the medications for longer periods. This gap between documented use and actual use suggests many patients are getting these medications outside their regular healthcare system, which could create safet
目的:大型远程保健公司和较小的美容医学提供商使用复合西马鲁肽和替西帕肽来满足消费者在短缺期间对这些药物的需求。在这项研究中,我们估计了这些药物的复合制剂在美国初级保健的文件率,并描述了这些药物的复合制剂和品牌制剂的用户之间的差异。方法:我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究,使用的数据来自美国家庭队列(American Family cohort),这是一个全国性的美国初级保健实践电子健康记录数据库,时间跨度为2021年1月1日至2024年12月31日。记录使用西马鲁肽和/或替西帕肽的患者被纳入研究。从结构化数据中识别品牌药物处方;从临床记录中确定了复合制剂的使用。结果包括使用复方制剂的患者比例及其特征。结果:153 044例纳入的患者中(女性占64.0%,平均年龄55.0岁),8.2%的患者使用复方制剂,随着时间的推移,使用西马鲁肽和替西帕肽的比例越来越大。复合制剂的使用者平均治疗持续时间更长(仅复合:10.0个月vs仅品牌:7.8个月),并且与仅使用品牌药物的患者相比,更可能是女性,非西班牙裔白人,非糖尿病患者,生活在社会经济剥夺程度较低的地区。结论:在2021年1月至2024年12月期间,美国初级保健机构使用复方西马鲁肽和替西帕肽的记录似乎低于调查报告,约23%的使用这些药物的患者从复方药物中获得这些药物。这表明许多患者可能在协调护理之外获得这些药物。在2022年至2024年的药物短缺期间,许多患者转向专业药房生产的常用减肥药西马鲁肽(Ozempic/Wegovy)和替西帕肽(Mounjaro/Zepbound)的复方制剂。我们分析了美国超过15.3万名使用这些药物的患者的医疗记录,以了解初级保健医生知道他们的患者使用复合配方的频率。我们发现,只有8.3%的患者在他们的医疗记录中记录了复合配方的使用,远低于之前的调查显示的23%的用户从远程医疗公司或美容诊所等非传统来源获得这些药物。与使用品牌产品的患者相比,使用复合配方产品的患者更有可能是白人、女性、非糖尿病患者,并且生活在较富裕的地区。他们使用药物的时间也更长。记录使用和实际使用之间的差距表明,许多患者在常规医疗系统之外服用这些药物,这可能会产生安全问题,因为医生可能不知道患者正在服用的所有药物,也无法正确监测副作用。
{"title":"Documentation of Compounded GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in a Large Primary Care Dataset.","authors":"Nathaniel Hendrix, Esther E Velásquez, Harry Pham, Andrew Bazemore","doi":"10.1002/pds.70227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70227","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Large telehealth companies and smaller aesthetic medicine providers used compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide to meet consumer demand for these drugs during their shortages. In this study, we estimate the documentation rate of compounded formulations of these drugs in the US primary care and characterize differences between users of compounded and brand-name formulations of these drugs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the American Family Cohort, a nationwide US database of electronic health records from primary care practices, spanning January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2024. Patients with documented semaglutide and/or tirzepatide use were included. Brand-name drug prescriptions were identified from structured data; compounded formulation use was identified from clinical notes. Outcomes included the proportion of patients using compounded formulations and their characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 153 044 included patients (64.0% female, mean age 55.0 years), 8.2% used compounded formulations, which made up an increasing share of semaglutide and tirzepatide use over time. Users of compounded formulations had longer mean therapy durations (compounded only: 10.0 months vs. brand-name only: 7.8 months) and were more likely to be female, non-Hispanic White, nondiabetic, and to live in areas of lower socioeconomic deprivation compared to patients who used only brand-name drugs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Between January 2021 and December 2024, documentation of compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide use in US primary care settings appeared lower than surveys reporting that approximately 23% of patients using these medications received them from compounders. This suggests that many patients may access these medications outside of coordinated care.</p><p><strong>Plain language summary: </strong>During drug shortages from 2022 to 2024, many patients turned to compounded formulations of popular weight-loss medications semaglutide (Ozempic/Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro/Zepbound) made by specialty pharmacies. We analyzed medical records from over 153 000 patients across the United States who used these medications to understand how often primary care doctors knew their patients were using compounded formulations. We found that only 8.3% of patients had documented use of compounded formulations in their medical records, far lower than previous surveys suggesting 23% of users get these medications from nontraditional sources like telehealth companies or aesthetic clinics. Patients using compounded formulations were more likely to be white, female, nondiabetic, and live in wealthier areas compared to those using brand-name versions. They also used the medications for longer periods. This gap between documented use and actual use suggests many patients are getting these medications outside their regular healthcare system, which could create safet","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70227"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145192335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kyungyeon Jung, Seong Jun Byun, Gyeongmin Lim, Jeong-Eun Lee, Hyesung Lee, Ju Hwan Kim, Ju-Young Shin
Purpose: To assess changes in study results in self-controlled case series (SCCS) studies and explore potential biases when applying incident and prevalent exposure and outcome scenarios.
Methods: We used the National Health Insurance Service database in South Korea to conduct two SCCS studies: (1) the risk of retinal detachment following fluoroquinolone use (expected elevated risk), and (2) the risk of acute cardiovascular disease following ranibizumab use (expected null association). Exposure and outcome scenarios were classified based on a washout period of 2 and 1 year, respectively, before the observation period: incident exposure-incident outcome, incident exposure-prevalent outcome, prevalent exposure-incident outcome, and prevalent exposure-prevalent outcome. For each scenario, conditional Poisson regression models, adjusted for time-varying age, estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results: In the fluoroquinolone study, IRRs of retinal detachment were as follows: 1.83 (95% CI 1.72-1.96) for incident exposure-incident outcome, 1.83 (1.71-1.95) for incident exposure-prevalent outcome, 1.71 (1.62-1.80) for prevalent exposure-incident outcome, and 1.70 (1.62-1.79) for prevalent exposure-prevalent outcome scenario. In the ranibizumab study, IRRs of acute cardiovascular disease were 0.91 (0.84-0.99), 0.89 (0.82-0.97), 1.02 (0.94-1.10), and 1.00 (0.93-1.08), respectively.
Conclusions: In prevalent exposure scenarios, IRRs in both studies were attenuated, consistent with prevalent user bias. In prevalent outcome scenarios, where survivor bias was anticipated, no notable shifts in IRRs were observed, possibly due to the high severity and low recurrence of the outcomes associated with the respective exposures. Further consideration of prevalent user and survivor bias is important when interpreting SCCS results. Additional research is needed to quantify the impact of varying exposure and outcome definitions on SCCS estimates.
目的:评估自我控制病例系列(SCCS)研究结果的变化,并探讨在应用事件和普遍暴露以及结果情景时的潜在偏差。方法:我们使用韩国国民健康保险服务数据库进行了两项SCCS研究:(1)氟喹诺酮类药物使用后视网膜脱离的风险(预期风险升高),(2)雷尼单抗使用后急性心血管疾病的风险(预期无关联)。根据观察期前2年和1年的洗脱期分别对暴露和结果情景进行分类:事件暴露-事件结果、事件暴露-普遍结果、普遍暴露-事件结果和普遍暴露-普遍结果。对于每种情况,使用条件泊松回归模型,对年龄随时间变化进行调整,估计发病率比(IRRs)为95%置信区间(ci)。结果:在氟喹诺酮研究中,视网膜脱离的irr如下:事件暴露-事件结局1.83 (95% CI 1.72-1.96),事件暴露-普遍结局1.83 (95% CI 1.71-1.95),普遍暴露-事件结局1.71 (95% CI 1.62-1.80),普遍暴露-普遍结局1.70 (95% CI 1.62-1.79)。在雷尼单抗研究中,急性心血管疾病的IRRs分别为0.91(0.84-0.99)、0.89(0.82-0.97)、1.02(0.94-1.10)和1.00(0.93-1.08)。结论:在普遍的暴露情况下,两项研究中的irr都减弱了,与普遍的用户偏见一致。在普遍结果情景中,预期存在幸存者偏倚,未观察到irr的显著变化,可能是由于与各自暴露相关的结果的高严重性和低复发率。在解释SCCS结果时,进一步考虑普遍存在的用户和幸存者偏见是很重要的。需要进一步的研究来量化不同暴露和结果定义对SCCS估计的影响。
{"title":"Potential Bias in Self-Controlled Case Series Design: Impact of Incident Versus Prevalent Scenarios of Exposure and Outcome.","authors":"Kyungyeon Jung, Seong Jun Byun, Gyeongmin Lim, Jeong-Eun Lee, Hyesung Lee, Ju Hwan Kim, Ju-Young Shin","doi":"10.1002/pds.70234","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70234","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess changes in study results in self-controlled case series (SCCS) studies and explore potential biases when applying incident and prevalent exposure and outcome scenarios.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used the National Health Insurance Service database in South Korea to conduct two SCCS studies: (1) the risk of retinal detachment following fluoroquinolone use (expected elevated risk), and (2) the risk of acute cardiovascular disease following ranibizumab use (expected null association). Exposure and outcome scenarios were classified based on a washout period of 2 and 1 year, respectively, before the observation period: incident exposure-incident outcome, incident exposure-prevalent outcome, prevalent exposure-incident outcome, and prevalent exposure-prevalent outcome. For each scenario, conditional Poisson regression models, adjusted for time-varying age, estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the fluoroquinolone study, IRRs of retinal detachment were as follows: 1.83 (95% CI 1.72-1.96) for incident exposure-incident outcome, 1.83 (1.71-1.95) for incident exposure-prevalent outcome, 1.71 (1.62-1.80) for prevalent exposure-incident outcome, and 1.70 (1.62-1.79) for prevalent exposure-prevalent outcome scenario. In the ranibizumab study, IRRs of acute cardiovascular disease were 0.91 (0.84-0.99), 0.89 (0.82-0.97), 1.02 (0.94-1.10), and 1.00 (0.93-1.08), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In prevalent exposure scenarios, IRRs in both studies were attenuated, consistent with prevalent user bias. In prevalent outcome scenarios, where survivor bias was anticipated, no notable shifts in IRRs were observed, possibly due to the high severity and low recurrence of the outcomes associated with the respective exposures. Further consideration of prevalent user and survivor bias is important when interpreting SCCS results. Additional research is needed to quantify the impact of varying exposure and outcome definitions on SCCS estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70234"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12504913/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145244695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Dear Pharmacoepidemiology and Outcomes Researcher: It's Time We Had the Transparency Talk.","authors":"Shirley V Wang","doi":"10.1002/pds.70237","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70237","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70237"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145275594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Elizabeth Moore, Mohammad Al Sallakh, Olufemi Olajide, Daira Trusinska, Tracy Jackson, Ting Shi, Sara J Brown, Joanna C Robson, Mwidimi Ndosi, Meghna Jani, Sir Aziz Sheikh, Constantinos Kallis, Stephanie J Lax, Jennifer K Quint
Purpose: Oral glucocorticoids (OGCs) have a broad range of uses and are effective in treating numerous conditions. However, it is commonly acknowledged that OGCs at high doses or over long periods have a burden of toxicity. Despite the use of steroid-sparing therapies, OGCs continue to be prescribed to treat a wide range of immune and inflammatory conditions. We aimed to address the following research questions: (1) what are the contemporary indications for high dose and/or long-term OGCs? (2) what patterns of use are described in the literature for high dose and/or long-term OGCs? (3) which evidence do we have for chronic conditions related to well-established steroid-sparing strategies and tapering regimes for OGCs? (4) what adverse effects have been reported with high dose and/or long-term OGCs?
Methods: A rapid scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. The Protocol has been published on the Open Science Framework. A systematic search of MEDLINE (Sep 2014 to Sep 2024) identified systematic reviews and scoping reviews involving adults (≥ 18 years) treated with high doses and/or long-term OGCs for chronic inflammatory conditions. Studies involving pregnant women were excluded.
Results: In total, 137 reviews were included. OGCs were indicated in 47 different conditions in dermatology, respiratory, gastrointestinal, hematology, immunology, rheumatology, and other miscellaneous categories. Across all specialties, OGCs were used either at high doses (at least 20 mg prednisone equivalent per day) or for long durations (for at least 3 months). For types of adverse effects reported in the included reviews, 20 were labeled as endocrine, 13 as immunological, 21 as musculoskeletal, 30 as gastrointestinal, and 16 as cardiovascular. Sixty-four reviews looked for/reported unspecified adverse events. One hundred and fifteen reviews had evidence of steroid-sparing/tapering regimes, indicating the wide use of these strategies to mitigate the harmful effects of OGCs.
Conclusion: OGCs are used for a broad range of inflammatory conditions across multiple specialties. There is evidence related to a broad range of potential adverse effects across multiple body systems regardless of the indication of use. Further research is needed using a combined cross-condition approach to their measurement and reduction, alongside gaining more insight into the impact of OGCs on patients' quality of life.
{"title":"Mapping Use of High Dose or Long-Term Oral Glucocorticoids and Steroid-Sparing Strategies in Adults With Chronic Conditions: A Rapid Scoping Review of Reviews.","authors":"Elizabeth Moore, Mohammad Al Sallakh, Olufemi Olajide, Daira Trusinska, Tracy Jackson, Ting Shi, Sara J Brown, Joanna C Robson, Mwidimi Ndosi, Meghna Jani, Sir Aziz Sheikh, Constantinos Kallis, Stephanie J Lax, Jennifer K Quint","doi":"10.1002/pds.70233","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70233","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Oral glucocorticoids (OGCs) have a broad range of uses and are effective in treating numerous conditions. However, it is commonly acknowledged that OGCs at high doses or over long periods have a burden of toxicity. Despite the use of steroid-sparing therapies, OGCs continue to be prescribed to treat a wide range of immune and inflammatory conditions. We aimed to address the following research questions: (1) what are the contemporary indications for high dose and/or long-term OGCs? (2) what patterns of use are described in the literature for high dose and/or long-term OGCs? (3) which evidence do we have for chronic conditions related to well-established steroid-sparing strategies and tapering regimes for OGCs? (4) what adverse effects have been reported with high dose and/or long-term OGCs?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A rapid scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. The Protocol has been published on the Open Science Framework. A systematic search of MEDLINE (Sep 2014 to Sep 2024) identified systematic reviews and scoping reviews involving adults (≥ 18 years) treated with high doses and/or long-term OGCs for chronic inflammatory conditions. Studies involving pregnant women were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 137 reviews were included. OGCs were indicated in 47 different conditions in dermatology, respiratory, gastrointestinal, hematology, immunology, rheumatology, and other miscellaneous categories. Across all specialties, OGCs were used either at high doses (at least 20 mg prednisone equivalent per day) or for long durations (for at least 3 months). For types of adverse effects reported in the included reviews, 20 were labeled as endocrine, 13 as immunological, 21 as musculoskeletal, 30 as gastrointestinal, and 16 as cardiovascular. Sixty-four reviews looked for/reported unspecified adverse events. One hundred and fifteen reviews had evidence of steroid-sparing/tapering regimes, indicating the wide use of these strategies to mitigate the harmful effects of OGCs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OGCs are used for a broad range of inflammatory conditions across multiple specialties. There is evidence related to a broad range of potential adverse effects across multiple body systems regardless of the indication of use. Further research is needed using a combined cross-condition approach to their measurement and reduction, alongside gaining more insight into the impact of OGCs on patients' quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 10","pages":"e70233"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12521885/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145293304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objectives: The safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has been extensively evaluated since the global rollout began. While serious adverse events are rare, safety issues continue to arise. This study evaluates the claim that earlier small vaccine batches were associated with higher rates of serious adverse events compared to later batches.
Design, participants, setting: A nationwide cohort study was conducted in Denmark, comprising individuals vaccinated with the BNT162b2 vaccine from 52 pre-defined batches classified into three pre-defined groups. Vaccinated individuals were matched 1:1 between batch groups on age, sex, and vaccination priority group. The study outcomes included 27 serious adverse events, two negative control outcomes, and all-cause mortality. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing rates between batch groups in the 28 days following vaccination. We conducted two comparisons of the early small batches to two groups of larger batches used later in the pandemic.
Results: In the study period, 9 983 728 vaccinations were administered from batches in the three pre-defined groups. Slightly increased rates of arrhythmia were observed in both study comparisons, HRs 1.25 (95% CI, 1.05-1.50) and 1.15 (1.00-1.31), respectively, but sensitivity analyses did not robustly support these associations. For the remaining outcomes, increased rates in both study comparisons were not observed.
Conclusion: This nationwide cohort study provides reassurance regarding the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine across different batches used in Denmark. The findings support the overall safety of the vaccine, with no clinically relevant variations in serious adverse event rates between batches.
{"title":"Safety of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Batches: A Nationwide Cohort Study.","authors":"Anders Hviid, Ingrid Bech Svalgaard","doi":"10.1002/pds.70207","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70207","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine has been extensively evaluated since the global rollout began. While serious adverse events are rare, safety issues continue to arise. This study evaluates the claim that earlier small vaccine batches were associated with higher rates of serious adverse events compared to later batches.</p><p><strong>Design, participants, setting: </strong>A nationwide cohort study was conducted in Denmark, comprising individuals vaccinated with the BNT162b2 vaccine from 52 pre-defined batches classified into three pre-defined groups. Vaccinated individuals were matched 1:1 between batch groups on age, sex, and vaccination priority group. The study outcomes included 27 serious adverse events, two negative control outcomes, and all-cause mortality. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing rates between batch groups in the 28 days following vaccination. We conducted two comparisons of the early small batches to two groups of larger batches used later in the pandemic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the study period, 9 983 728 vaccinations were administered from batches in the three pre-defined groups. Slightly increased rates of arrhythmia were observed in both study comparisons, HRs 1.25 (95% CI, 1.05-1.50) and 1.15 (1.00-1.31), respectively, but sensitivity analyses did not robustly support these associations. For the remaining outcomes, increased rates in both study comparisons were not observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This nationwide cohort study provides reassurance regarding the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine across different batches used in Denmark. The findings support the overall safety of the vaccine, with no clinically relevant variations in serious adverse event rates between batches.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 9","pages":"e70207"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12355449/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144855980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Purpose: Chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) is a common comorbid disease in lung cancer causing disability. A long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) is commonly given to patients with moderate to very severe COPD. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between LABA treatment and the risk of lung cancer in patients with COPD using a national representative database.
Methods: We conducted the analyses using the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database. Patients with at least two outpatient visits or one hospitalization due to COPD diagnosis (ICD-9-CM: 491, 492, 494, 496) from 1997 to 2012 were identified. Patients in the LABA cohort had regularly used LABA during the study period, while the non-LABA cohort was those without receiving LABA treatment. A 1:2 propensity score matching by COPD diagnosis year, index year, sex, age, occupation, comorbidities, and medication usage was applied.
Results: A total of 3924 patients with COPD were enrolled in the study, 1308 patients with regular LABA treatment and 2616 patients without LABA treatment. Approximately half of the study subjects were male (54.8%), with a mean age of 63.1 years. Those with LABA treatment who were male (aHR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.09-4.22) had an increased risk of lung cancer.
Conclusions: This study indicated that LABA treatment in patients with COPD was associated with lung cancer in older men; those with high cumulative daily doses.
目的:慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)是肺癌致残的常见合并症。长效β2激动剂(LABA)通常用于中度至极重度COPD患者。本研究旨在利用全国代表性数据库评估LABA治疗与COPD患者肺癌风险之间的关系。方法:我们使用纵向健康保险数据库进行分析。从1997年到2012年,因COPD诊断至少两次门诊就诊或一次住院的患者(ICD-9-CM: 491,492,494,496)被确定。LABA队列患者在研究期间定期使用LABA,而非LABA队列为未接受LABA治疗的患者。采用1:2倾向评分匹配COPD诊断年、指标年、性别、年龄、职业、合并症和用药情况。结果:共有3924例COPD患者入组,其中常规LABA治疗1308例,未进行LABA治疗2616例。大约一半的研究对象为男性(54.8%),平均年龄为63.1岁。接受LABA治疗的男性(aHR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.09-4.22)患肺癌的风险增加。结论:本研究提示,老年男性COPD患者LABA治疗与肺癌相关;那些每日累积剂量高的人。
{"title":"Impact of Long-Acting Beta-Agonists on Progressive Risk of Lung Cancer in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Nationwide Cohort Study.","authors":"Shih-Hsun Lin, Yu-Chun Lin, Tsai-Hui Lin, Hung-Jen Lin, Mei-Chen Lin, Sheng-Teng Huang","doi":"10.1002/pds.70204","DOIUrl":"10.1002/pds.70204","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) is a common comorbid disease in lung cancer causing disability. A long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) is commonly given to patients with moderate to very severe COPD. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between LABA treatment and the risk of lung cancer in patients with COPD using a national representative database.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted the analyses using the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database. Patients with at least two outpatient visits or one hospitalization due to COPD diagnosis (ICD-9-CM: 491, 492, 494, 496) from 1997 to 2012 were identified. Patients in the LABA cohort had regularly used LABA during the study period, while the non-LABA cohort was those without receiving LABA treatment. A 1:2 propensity score matching by COPD diagnosis year, index year, sex, age, occupation, comorbidities, and medication usage was applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3924 patients with COPD were enrolled in the study, 1308 patients with regular LABA treatment and 2616 patients without LABA treatment. Approximately half of the study subjects were male (54.8%), with a mean age of 63.1 years. Those with LABA treatment who were male (aHR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.09-4.22) had an increased risk of lung cancer.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study indicated that LABA treatment in patients with COPD was associated with lung cancer in older men; those with high cumulative daily doses.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 9","pages":"e70204"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144874483","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}