Keywords
Major depressive disorder, prescription drugs, drug utilization, register study, comorbidity, latent class model
Major depressive disorder, prescription drugs, drug utilization, register study, comorbidity, latent class model
Major Depressive disorder (MDD) is a heterogeneous, multi-etiological disorder that is considered a major global health burden with approximately 264 million people affected worldwide1 [WHO - depression]. The disorder is displayed with varying symptomology and treatment efficacy, and the full understanding of the pathophysiology of MDD remains incomplete. It is well-established that the prevalence of MDD is substantially increased in patients with somatic disorders including diabetes,2,3 cancer,4,5 cardiovascular diseases,6 chronic pain,7 migraine,8 and sleep disorders.9 Moreover, the co-occurrence of MDD and somatic diseases is associated with worsened prognostic outcomes.10 A high prevalence of somatic diseases in MDD patients indicates a high disease burden as well as a complex MDD etiology. Previous studies have mainly focused on one drug at a time, or one disease at a time. Investigating drugs or diseases related to MDD individually may be too simplistic an approach. Using Latent Class Analysis, we will map the overall use of drugs for somatic diseases in MDD patients which will reveal homogenous MDD patient subgroups with different somatic drug profiles. These homogenous patient subgroups can potentially provide an understanding of unique MDD etiology that requires unique treatment strategies and further, some treatment groups might have a higher risk of drug interactions.
The aim of our research is therefore to provide a full picture of the somatic pharmacological treatment burden in MDD patients. In this study, we will first characterize somatic drug profiles from three years prior to three years past index diagnosis of MDD, and secondly, depict the trajectories of patients from one drug profile to another over time. Finally, the drug profiles and trajectories will be characterized by age, gender, education, and MDD severity.
The study will be a register-based drug utilization study assessing somatic pharmacological treatment profiles and their trajectories, or transitions over time, in patients with a first-time MDD diagnosis. The MDD patients are diagnosed at time 0 (index date) between 2011 and 2015 (the study inclusion period) and followed over the patient observation period defined as three years prior to the index MDD diagnosis until three years after the diagnosis (Figure 1A). Using Latent Class Analysis (LCA) the somatic drug profiles for the MDD patients will be determined at four seven-month intervals defined by the following time points: three years before the index date, index date, seven months after the index date, and three years after the index date (Figure 1B). The trajectories, i.e. drug profile changes throughout the four periods, will then be determined and characterized.
Inclusion criteria
To be eligible for the study, individuals must have met three inclusion criteria: 1) Patients have received an MDD diagnosis at a psychiatric unit between 1st of January 2011 till 31st of December 2015. 2) The MDD diagnosis must be a first-time (index) diagnosis. The diagnosis is defined as first-time if the patients do not have a history of MDD 15 years prior to the (index) diagnosis. 3) The MDD diagnosis must be the primary/action diagnosis (“A-diagnosis”).
The information regarding the MDD diagnosis, date of diagnosis, and diagnosis type is available through the Danish National Patient Register (DNPR).11 The International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) will be used to identify the MDD diagnosis including either a single episode of depression (ICD-10 code F32) or recurrent depressive episode (ICD-10 code F33).
Exclusion criteria
The following individuals will be excluded from the study (Figure 2): 1) Patients with hospital contact up to 15 years prior to the first-time diagnosis with MDD due to the following A-diagnosis disorders: Manic episodes (F30), Bipolar affective disorder (F31), Schizophrenia (F20-F29), and Dementia (F00-F03), 2) Individuals with no available data on gender or date of birth from the Danish Civil Registration System (CRS)12 at any time during the study inclusion period from 20011-2015, 3) Patients that have migrated to or from Denmark within the period of 15 years prior to the first-time MDD diagnosis, and 4) MDD patients under the age of 10 at the index date.
Sample size calculation
To make the outcome significant, it is suggested to include at least 300 individuals in a Latent Class Analysis (LCA).13 We expect the number of included individuals in our study to exceed 300 considering an inclusion period of 5 years and a high prevalence of MDD.
The prescription of pharmacological treatment for somatic disorders will be available through the Danish National Prescription Register (NPR).14 The given somatic drug type is characterized by the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical code (ATC code). All ATC codes except N05 and N06 (psychotropic drugs) will be defined as somatic drugs. For the purpose of not getting an excessive amount of observations, the drug types used in this study will be at the chemical subgroup level of the drugs (4th level). A prescription drug will be considered as a taken drug if a patient has redeemed the drug at the community pharmacy at least twice during any of the 7-month intervals. The chemical subgroup drug types for somatic diseases are chosen based on the frequency of prescription: For each of the four intervals, prescription drugs redeemed by at least 0.5% of the study population will be considered; the combination of these ATC codes across all intervals will comprise the final drug portfolio to be submitted to the LCA model (Figure 3).
The covariates used for this study are gender (male/female), age at index date (<18, 18-34, 35-64, and 65+), level of MDD severity, and education level. Gender and age are retrieved from the CRS. MDD symptom severity is categorized either as mild depression (F32.0, F33.0), moderate depression (F32.1, F33.1), severe depression (F32.2, F32.3, F33.2, F33.3), or unspecified (F32.4, F32.5, F33.4, F32.8, F32.9, F33.8, F33.9). This information is available through the DNPR. The educational level at index date will be available through the Danish Education Register (DER)15 and will be divided into four categories: ‘Primary lower secondary’, ‘Upper secondary’, ‘Bachelor, Masters, Doctoral’, or ‘Missing or not classified’.
This study is approved by the Regional Data Authorities (ref. P-2020-88). A Danish research study based on register data does not need ethical approval from the Danish Council on Ethics when the study does not involve biological material [The Danish National Committee On Health Research Ethics]. The data used for this study is obtained through Statistics Denmark (DST). All data is anonymized and solely aggregated data will be reported [DST Data for Research].
All statistical analyses will be performed using SAS Enterprise Guide 7.1 (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567). Alternatively, R (R Project for Statistical Computing, RRID:SCR_001905) could be used as an open-source software.
Latent Class Analyses (LCA) are used to identify unobservable subgroups (classes or clusters) within a population. These unobservable subgroups, called latent classes, have similar patterns of their shared set of observable variables from a data set. In this study, LCA will be performed utilizing the drugs that the MDD patients have redeemed at the pharmacy as indicator variables. The variables will be dichotomized into two categories: prescription drugs redeemed twice during an interval (1) and redeemed once or less (0). The latent variable will represent the drug profiles for somatic diseases in patients with MDD (Figure 4A).
First, the study population will be divided randomly into two equal groups: a development cohort and a validation cohort. For the four respective time intervals, the LCA model will be fitted with a different number of classes for the development and validation cohort. This will be done to confirm that the best model fit for the development cohort corresponds to the best model fit for the validation cohort. The optimum number of latent classes will be determined by the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC),16,17 together with a clinical judgment of a psychiatrist. A decrease in BIC will indicate a better model fit, and the model that will yield the lowest BIC will be chosen.18–20 In a case where the model fit for the development- and validation cohorts lead to a different number of latent classes, the clinical judgment will define the final number of classes.
After fitting the LCA model, the MDD patients will be assigned to a latent class (i.e. drug profile) where they have the highest probability of belonging compared to other classes (modal assignment). Similar analyses will be performed for each time interval. Each latent class/drug profile will have a unique pattern of redeemed prescription drugs based on the estimated item-response probabilities, i.e. the probabilities of receiving the chemical subgroup drugs given a particular class membership. All profiles will be characterized with the covariables gender, age, education level and MDD severity.
The treatment trajectories are the transitions in latent class membership (drug profiles) over time (Figure 4B). Through modal assignment, all patients will be assigned to a class at each time interval. The trajectories will be identified by cross tabulating these assignments in each time interval. Thereby, the frequencies of each treatment trajectory will be obtained and thereafter, covariables will be associated with each trajectory. The trajectories will be visualized through a Sankey Diagram.
Drug use in MDD with chronic comorbidities is exceedingly complex, and it is expected that MDD patients have a high pharmacological treatment burden. We have not been able to identify studies that have investigated this treatment burden through the characterization of multiple drug profiles. Drug use in a population is multiplicative, and it is therefore hoped that this study will provide new insights into MDD, comorbidities, treatment burden and patterns through the characterization of homogeneous MDD subgroups in respect to somatic drug use.
Some limitations to the study have been identified. Our first issue, which is to only include patients with MDD as a primary diagnosis, can be considered both an advantage and a limitation. By exclusively involving patients with the primary diagnosis, we will get a more homogeneous group. Moreover, the primary diagnosis is usually given by a psychiatric specialist at the hospital, which is rarely the case with a secondary diagnosis. However, MDD can be given as a secondary diagnosis to patients after a chronic somatic disease, and it is, therefore, plausible that these patients have somatic drug profiles that might be overlooked in our study. Some important observations might be overlooked because the patient has been given a primary diagnosis of a chronic disease when going to the hospital and have been given MDD as a secondary diagnosis. Our second limitation is that the study solely includes prescription drugs redeemed at the community pharmacy. By using the Danish National Prescription Registry, it is not possible to retrieve over-the-counter drugs such as mild analgesics. The medication received at the hospital cannot be retrieved either. Therefore, the drug profiles may be more complex in reality than what will be obtained from the prescription drugs in this study. The third limitation is the neglect of drugs only redeemed once. It was decided that a prescription drug must be redeemed twice during a time interval of seven months. In Denmark, prescription drugs are typically redeemed in three-month supplies, and the intervals in our study are more than twice this duration. This design was chosen to ensure compliance in our population. However, by our approach, some somatic drugs that will only be redeemed once are not included, e.g. antibiotics treatment courses contained in a single package. Our fourth limitation is that we will include the most frequent drug types which can lead to a neglect of drugs for rare diseases. To minimize the running time of SAS, it was decided to not include the most rarely prescribed somatic drugs during each interval (drugs with a frequency less than 0.5%). This could potentially lead to a neglect of somatic drugs for rare chronic diseases, since they will not be as frequently prescribed, however, they could be equally valuable to analyze. These limitations will be considered when interpreting the results. Moreover, while interpreting the results we will consider that some prescription drugs can be given for several different indications (e.g. corticosteroids).
Through the identification of homogeneous MDD subgroups according to drug use, a better understanding of the somatic diseases and treatment burden in MDD can be provided. Identifying drug profiles in MDD will represent disease patterns which in turn can represent unique MDD etiology. In the future, it can therefore be investigated if the patient subgroups with unique somatic drug patterns will respond differently to various types of antidepressants. Moreover, specific patient subgroups and trajectories can be associated with treatment outcomes and thus become a novel way to identify long-term treatment strategies.
All data sources used in this study are Danish registers that are linked to the unique personal identification number (CPR number) of the patients. The registers have been made available for us by Statistics Denmark (DST) [DST Registers in Statistics Denmark].
The study will be conducted by following the Strengthening of Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines [STROBE Statement].
Conceptualization: All authors
Methodology: Anne Marije Christina Overgaard Nielsen, Janne Petersen, Kristoffer Jarlov Jensen, Pernille Herold Jeberg
Supervision: Kristoffer Jarlov Jensen, Janne Petersen, Ramune Jacobsen
Visualization: Anne Marije Christina Overgaard Nielsen
Writing – Original Draft Preparation: Anne Marije Christina Overgaard Nielsen
Writing – Review & Editing: All authors
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?
Partly
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?
Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?
Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Not applicable
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: psychiatric genetics, epidemiology
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Dr Veronica Vitriol G is a Clinical psychiatrist and Magister in Psychology PHD Maria de la Luz Aylwin is Bachelor of Science, mention in Biology Doctorate in Physiology.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | ||
---|---|---|
1 | 2 | |
Version 1 12 Oct 21 |
read | read |
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (0)