Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Apr;39(4):349-361.
doi: 10.1007/s10654-024-01119-3. Epub 2024 May 8.

Prospective benchmarking of an observational analysis in the SWEDEHEART registry against the REDUCE-AMI randomized trial

Affiliations

Prospective benchmarking of an observational analysis in the SWEDEHEART registry against the REDUCE-AMI randomized trial

Anthony A Matthews et al. Eur J Epidemiol. 2024 Apr.

Abstract

Prospective benchmarking of an observational analysis against a randomized trial increases confidence in the benchmarking process as it relies exclusively on aligning the protocol of the trial and the observational analysis, while the trials findings are unavailable. The Randomized Evaluation of Decreased Usage of Betablockers After Myocardial Infarction (REDUCE-AMI, ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03278509) trial started recruitment in September 2017 and results are expected in 2024. REDUCE-AMI aimed to estimate the effect of long-term use of beta blockers on the risk of death and myocardial following a myocardial infarction with preserved left ventricular systolic ejection fraction. We specified the protocol of a target trial as similar as possible to that of REDUCE-AMI, then emulated the target trial using observational data from Swedish healthcare registries. Had everyone followed the treatment strategy as specified in the target trial protocol, the observational analysis estimated a reduction in the 5-year risk of death or myocardial infarction of 0.8 percentage points for beta blockers compared with no beta blockers; effects ranging from an absolute reduction of 4.5 percentage points to an increase of 2.8 percentage points in the risk of death or myocardial infarction were compatible with our data under conventional statistical criteria. Once results of REDUCE-AMI are published, we will compare the results of our observational analysis against those from the trial. If this prospective benchmarking is successful, it supports the credibility of additional analyses using these observational data, which can rapidly deliver answers to questions that could not be answered by the initial trial. If benchmarking proves unsuccessful, we will conduct a "postmortem" analysis to identify the reasons for the discrepancy. Prospective benchmarking shifts the investigator focus away from an endeavour to use observational data to obtain similar results as a completed randomized trial, to a systematic attempt to align the design and analysis of the trial and the observational analysis.

Keywords: Benchmarking; Causal inference; Randomized trials; Target trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

M.A.H. is a consultant for Cytel and ProPublica, and a member of the Scientific Advisory Board for ADIA Lab, Flatiron and Foundation Medicine. R.H. reports speaker fees from Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart for selection of eligible individuals into an emulation of a target trial of beta blockers versus no beta blockers in individuals with myocardial infarction with preserved ejection fraction in Sweden, 2011–2017
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Estimated risk of death and myocardial infarction under beta blockers versus no beta blockers. Intention-to-treat analysis of an emulated target trial in individuals with myocardial infarction with preserved ejection fraction in Sweden, 2011–2017 (shaded intervals represent limits of the pointwise 95% CIs)

References

    1. Dahabreh IJ, Robins JM, Hernán MA. Benchmarking observational methods by comparing randomized trials and their emulations. Epidemiology. 2020;31:614–619. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001231. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Matthews AA, Dahabreh IJ, Fröbert O, et al. Benchmarking observational analyses before using them to address questions trials do not answer: an application to coronary thrombus aspiration. Am J Epidemiol. 2022;2:kwac098. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Matthews AA, Szummer K, Dahabreh IJ, et al. Comparing effect estimates in randomized trials and observational studies from the same population: an application to percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021;10:e020357. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.020357. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lodi S, Phillips A, Lundgren J, et al. Effect estimates in randomized trials and observational studies: comparing apples with apples. Am J Epidemiol. 2019;188:1569–1577. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwz100. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Garcia-Albeniz X, Chan JM, Paciorek A, et al. Immediate versus deferred initiation of androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer patients with PSA-only relapse. An observational follow-up study. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:817–824. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.03.003. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Associated data