Table 7.

Results From Disease Risk Score^a–Adjusted Analyses Using Different Combinations of Confounding Adjustment Methods and Data-Sharing Approaches to Compare Non–Tumor Necrosis Factor α Inhibitors With Tumor Necrosis Factor α Inhibitors (Empirical Example 2)^b

Confounding Adjustment Method and Data-Sharing Approach	Effectiveness Outcome (Treatment Switching)c		Safety Outcome (Serious Infections)d
	OR	95% CI	OR	95% CI
Stratification
Pooled individual-level	0.53	0.35, 0.78	0.88	0.42, 1.64
Risk-set	0.53	0.36, 0.78	0.88	0.42, 1.64
Summary-table	0.53	0.35, 0.78	0.88	0.42, 1.64
Effect-estimate, fixed-effect	0.56	0.38, 0.82	0.97	0.52, 1.82
Effect-estimate, random-effects	0.51	0.28, 0.96	0.97	0.52, 1.82
Heterogeneity (Qe) and P value	2.67	0.2624	0.24	0.8832
Matching
Pooled individual-level	0.41	0.26, 0.63	0.86	0.37, 1.93
Risk-set	0.41	0.26, 0.63	0.86	0.37, 1.93
Summary-table	0.41	0.26, 0.63	0.86	0.37, 1.93
Effect-estimate, fixed-effect	0.41	0.27, 0.63	0.89	0.40, 1.98
Effect-estimate, random-effects	0.41	0.27, 0.63	0.89	0.40, 1.98
Heterogeneity (Q) and P value	1.77	0.4115	0.00	0.9961
	HR	95% CI	HR	95% CI
Stratification
Pooled individual-level	0.59	0.41, 0.84	0.86	0.47, 1.57
Risk-set	0.59	0.41, 0.84	0.86	0.47, 1.57
Summary-table	0.58	0.39, 0.83	0.86	0.42, 1.57
Effect-estimate, fixed-effect	0.63	0.44, 0.91	0.95	0.52, 1.75
Effect-estimate, random-effects	0.59	0.26, 1.32	0.95	0.52, 1.75
Heterogeneity (Q) and P value	3.83	0.1466	0.21	0.8989
Matching
Pooled individual-level	0.46	0.31, 0.68	0.89	0.42, 1.86
Risk-set	0.46	0.31, 0.68	0.89	0.42, 1.86
Summary-table	0.45	0.30, 0.68	0.88	0.38, 1.95
Effect-estimate, fixed-effect	0.47	0.32, 0.70	0.91	0.42, 2.00
Effect-estimate, random-effects	0.52	0.22, 1.25	0.91	0.42, 2.00
Heterogeneity (Q) and P value	4.01	0.1345	0.00	1.0000

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; OR, odds ratio; TNFi, tumor necrosis factor α inhibitor.

^a The disease risk score was estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression in patients receiving tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor biologicals.

^b There were 407 (5.2%) patients who initiated use of non-TNFi biologicals and 7,419 (94.8%) patients who initiated use of TNFi biologicals.

^c The incidence of treatment switching was 7.6% in new users of non-TNFi biologicals and 11.2% in new users of TNFi biologicals.

^d The incidence of serious infection was 2.9% in new users of non-TNFi biologicals and 3.1% in new users of TNFi biologicals.

^eQ is a measure of heterogeneity among the 3 data-contributing sites. The summary statistic and P value from Cochran’s Q test are shown.