ClinicalCodes.org
An online clinical codes repository to improve validity and reproducibility of medical database research
Research article:
Can analyses of electronic patient records be independently and externally validated? Study 2: the Effect of Beta-Adrenoceptor Blocker Therapy on Cancer Survival; a Retrospective Cohort Study
Reference:
David a Springate, Darren M Ashcroft, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Tim Doran, Ronan Ryan, David Reeves(2015) Can analyses of electronic patient records be independently and externally validated? Study 2: the Effect of Beta-Adrenoceptor Blocker Therapy on Cancer Survival; a Retrospective Cohort Study. BMJ Open, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007299
- Link to fulltext article
- Abstract
- Objectives To conduct a fully independent and external validation of a research study based on one electronic health record database, using a different database sampling the same population. Design Retrospective cohort analysis of beta-blocker therapy and all-cause mortality in cancer patients. Setting Two UK national primary care databases (PCDs): the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and Doctors’ Independent Network (DIN). Participants CPRD data for 11302 cancer patients compared to published results from DIN for 3462 patients. Study period January 1997 to December 2006. Primary and secondary outcome measures All-cause mortality: overall; by treatment subgroup (betablockers only, beta-blockers plus other blood pressure lowering medicines (BPLM), other BPLMs only); and by cancer-site. Results Using CPRD, beta-blocker use was not associated with mortality (HR=1.03, 95%CI 0.93-1.14, vs patients prescribed other BPLMs only), but in DIN beta-blocker users had significantly higher mortality (HR=1.18, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.33). However, these hazard ratios were not statistically different (p=0.063), but did differ for patients on beta-blockers alone (CPRD=0.94, 95%CI 0.82-1.07; DIN=1.37, 95%CI 1.16-1.61; p<0.001). Results for nine individual cancer sites differed by study, but only significantly for prostate and pancreas cancers. Results were robust under sensitivity analyses, but we could not be certain that mortality was identically defined in both databases. Conclusions We found a complex pattern of similarities and differences between databases. Our finding that overall treatment effect estimates were not statistically different, adds to a growing body of evidence that different UK PCDs produce effect estimates comparable within statistical tolerance. However, some subgroup effects differed significantly and individually the two studies lead to different conclusions regarding the safety of beta-blockers for cancer patients. Single studies based on internally well-validated databases therefore do not guarantee generalisable results, especially for subgroups. In all cases, confirmatory studies using at least one other independent data source are strongly recommended.
- Author for correspondence
- David Reeves
- Email for correspondence
- david.reeves@manchester.ac.uk
Code list: res24: renal cancer
6 codes in list
| Code | Coding system | Description | Entity type | List name | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B4A0.00 | Read | Malig neop kidney parenchyma | diagnostic | res24: renal cancer | |||
| B4A0000 | Read | Hypernephroma | diagnostic | res24: renal cancer | |||
| B4A1.00 | Read | Malig neop renal pelvis | diagnostic | res24: renal cancer | |||
| B4A1000 | Read | Malig neop renal calyces | diagnostic | res24: renal cancer | |||
| B4A1100 | Read | Malig neop ureteropelvic junct | diagnostic | res24: renal cancer | |||
| B4A1z00 | Read | Malig neop renal pelvis NOS | diagnostic | res24: renal cancer |
Please log in to leave a comment.
Code list links:
ClinicalCodes is a project at the University of Manchester Institute of Population Health
The ClinicalCodes project is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR)