Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Inhaled steroids and mortality in COPD: bias from unaccounted immortal time

V.A. Kiri, J. Vestbo, N.B. Pride, J.B. Soriano
European Respiratory Journal 2004 24: 190-191; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.04.00049804
V.A. Kiri
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Vestbo
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
N.B. Pride
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.B. Soriano
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

To the Editor:

In the March 2004 issue of the European Respiratory Journal, an article was published in which Suissa 1 claimed to replicate the design of our previously published study 2 in a different cohort in Saskatchewan. Our study had suggested that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with or without long-acting β2‐agonists were associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality risk in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients compared to short-acting bronchodilators alone. From his analysis in a different dataset, S. Suissa makes the categorical statement in the last line of the abstract that our published conclusion “is the result of bias from unaccounted immortal time in its cohort design and analysis”. This statement, astonishingly, totally omits any consideration of differences between the results of the Saskatchewan database and the General Practice Research Database we used.

We are well aware of an earlier paper by Suissa 3 on bias due to unaccounted immortal time, which clearly is irrelevant to our paper published in the European Respiratory Journal 2. However, S. Suissa now postulates that the association we found was due to a further “subtle” type of unaccounted immortal time bias. Our study design specifically addressed the issue of immortal time bias as defined in analytical epidemiology 4.

First, patient follow-up time in the cohort design only started a day after the immortal period of 180 days from the start of therapy (see p. 820 and figs 1 and 4 in our paper 2). S. Suissa suggests that because “regular treatment” was defined as at least three prescriptions of the relevant drug in the 180 days after the first prescription, cohort entry should be defined as the date of the third prescription and this has a significant impact in his analyses. The distinction may matter in the Saskatchewan database but in our study it was irrelevant as groups receiving ICS actually had shorter duration between first and third prescription than the control group (short-acting bronchodilators: 87.1 days; fluticasone: only 77.3 days; and fluticasone and salmeterol: 74.3 days). Thus, the theoretical distinction between the first and third prescription was without any relevance and seems difficult to justify. In our study, we also reported the number of prescriptions of the relevant drugs over the first 12 months after cohort entry, providing strong evidence that the initial pattern of prescribing in our groups was well maintained.

Secondly, we are unable to follow his reasoning on the “hierarchial” approach to treatment, which is implicit in the stepped care approach recommended in all major guidelines on COPD (and asthma) throughout the 1990s. Indeed, we are unaware of the circumstances that would lead to regular prescription of ICS in COPD without regular use of bronchodilators (see Suissa 1, p. 393, table 1, column 3). Comparison of table 1 in our study 2 and table 1 in Suissa 1 shows that drug use was more irregular in the Saskatchewan database with low use of the recommended bronchodilators. In spite of this, S. Suissa's own results using “very first regular exposure identified after diagnosis” in his “conventional intention-to-treat approach” still indicated a significant association between ICS use and mortality, rate ratio 0.75 (0.62–0.90). Furthermore, S. Suissa ignores that our study used two designs, a cohort approach for the main analysis and a nested case-control approach to explore a dose-response relationship, with both methods indicating an association with ICS. The latter design has been described previously by Suissa 5 as one that simplifies the cohort analysis when exposures vary over time and leads to valid estimates with negligible loss in precision.

Finally, Suissa 1 used a time-dependent exposure approach and obtained results, which suggested that inhaled corticosteroids were not better than bronchodilators at reducing the risk of death in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. We are not surprised that the benefit of inhaled corticosteroids could not be established with the treatment switching approach. This methodology is known to be valid only if the reason for the switch to inhaled corticosteroids is unrelated to the patient's subsequent risk of death 6. In our setting, the switch to inhaled corticosteroids was unlikely to be independent of mortality risk. Clinical experience suggests inhaled corticosteroids would be prescribed to sicker patients who were no longer responsive to bronchodilator therapy alone.

    • © ERS Journals Ltd

    References

    1. ↵
      Suissa S. Inhaled steroids and mortality in COPD: bias from unaccounted immortal time. Eur Respir J 2004;23:391–395.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    2. ↵
      Soriano JB, Vestbo J, Pride NB, Kiri V, Maden C, Maier WC. Survival in COPD patients after regular use of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol in general practice. Eur Respir J 2002;20:819–825.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    3. ↵
      Suissa S. Effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: immortal time bias in observational studies. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003;168:49–53.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    4. ↵
      Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Modern epidemiology, 2nd Edn. Hagerstown, Lippincott-Raven, 1998.
    5. ↵
      Suissa S. Novel approaches to pharmacoepidemiology study design and statistical analysis. In: Strom BL, ed. PharmacoepidemiologyNew York, John Wiley and Sons, 2000; pp. 785–805.
    6. ↵
      Clayton D, Hills M. Statistical methods in epidemiology. Oxford, Oxford Science Publications, 1993; p. 309.
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    View this article with LENS
    Vol 24 Issue 1 Table of Contents
    • Table of Contents
    • Index by author
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Inhaled steroids and mortality in COPD: bias from unaccounted immortal time
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Print
    Citation Tools
    Inhaled steroids and mortality in COPD: bias from unaccounted immortal time
    V.A. Kiri, J. Vestbo, N.B. Pride, J.B. Soriano
    European Respiratory Journal Jul 2004, 24 (1) 190-191; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.04.00049804

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero

    Share
    Inhaled steroids and mortality in COPD: bias from unaccounted immortal time
    V.A. Kiri, J. Vestbo, N.B. Pride, J.B. Soriano
    European Respiratory Journal Jul 2004, 24 (1) 190-191; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.04.00049804
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    Full Text (PDF)

    Jump To

    • Article
      • References
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    More in this TOC Section

    • The alarmin(g) effect of interleukin-5 blockade on residual eosinophil function is of clinical consequence
    • The association between immunosuppressant and the outcome of COVID-19
    • Wider access to quality-assured rifapentine-based regimens is needed to accelerate tuberculosis prevention and care globally
    Show more Correspondence

    Related Articles

    Navigate

    • Home
    • Current issue
    • Archive

    About the ERJ

    • Journal information
    • Editorial board
    • Reviewers
    • Press
    • Permissions and reprints
    • Advertising

    The European Respiratory Society

    • Society home
    • myERS
    • Privacy policy
    • Accessibility

    ERS publications

    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS books online
    • ERS Bookshop

    Help

    • Feedback

    For authors

    • Instructions for authors
    • Publication ethics and malpractice
    • Submit a manuscript

    For readers

    • Alerts
    • Subjects
    • Podcasts
    • RSS

    Subscriptions

    • Accessing the ERS publications

    Contact us

    European Respiratory Society
    442 Glossop Road
    Sheffield S10 2PX
    United Kingdom
    Tel: +44 114 2672860
    Email: journals@ersnet.org

    ISSN

    Print ISSN:  0903-1936
    Online ISSN: 1399-3003

    Copyright © 2022 by the European Respiratory Society