Back

Can Predictive Modeling Inform the Selection of Time Zero for Target Trial Emulations? An Empirical Study of Atorvastatin Initiation in Medicare Beneficiaries

Rowan, C. G.; Maringe, C.

2026-05-06 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.05.05.26352148 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeWhen emulating trials of medication initiation using real-world data, there may be ambiguity regarding the most suitable time zero event for the research question of interest. The time zero event must be strongly associated with the clinical indication for treatment, confer a high probability of actual treatment initiation, and be measurable with sufficient temporal precision in the source data. When it is uncertain whether a candidate event will satisfy these three conditions simultaneously, empirical identification of predictors of medication initiation can provide valuable guidance. The objective of this study was to empirically identify predictors of incident atorvastatin initiation to inform the definition of time zero for future target trial emulations. MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using Medicare claims data (study period January 1, 2018 - December 31, 2019). The cohort included statin naive beneficiaries aged [≥] 65 years with [≥] 12 months of continuous enrollment, as of the study period start date, and at least one new or incident prescription claim after study period start date. Atorvastatin initiation was defined by the first dispensing (index date). Non-atorvastatin initiators (reference group) were sampled at 25%; their index date was a randomly selected date of a new medication dispensing. Candidate predictor variables were ascertained in the 6 months pre-index and included demographics, comorbidities (classified separately from inpatient and outpatient claims), healthcare utilization, and pharmacotherapy. We developed and applied an eight-step procedure to identify independent predictors of incident atorvastatin initiation. ResultsThe study cohort comprised 481,742 incident atorvastatin initiators and 896,575 non-atorvastatin initiators (25% random sample). The strongest predictors of atorvastatin initiation were inpatient admission for cerebral infarction (OR 11.51, 95% CI 10.79-12.27) and myocardial infarction (OR 5.32, 95% CI 5.03-5.62). For example, a White male with a recent inpatient diagnosis of cerebral infarction had a predicted probability of atorvastatin initiation of 82% (95% CI 81-83%). ConclusionThe empirically identified predictors of atorvastatin initiation (acute cardio/cerebrovascular events) align with ACC/AHA guidelines recommending prompt statin therapy for secondary prevention. These predictors satisfy the three key requirements for a valid time zero event and should mitigate selection bias, channeling bias, and residual confounding in future target trial emulations. KEY POINTSO_LIFindings: Acute myocardial infarction and cerebral infarction recorded during an inpatient admission were the strongest predictors of incident atorvastatin initiation among statin-naive Medicare beneficiaries age 65 years and older. C_LIO_LIClinical Context: These findings align with current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines that recommend prompt statin therapy for secondary prevention after these acute cardiovascular events. C_LIO_LIImplications for Future Research: Anchoring the time zero event to an inpatient admission for myocardial/cerebral infarction satisfies the three key requirements for a valid time zero event when studying medication initiation: it is strongly associated with the clinical indication for treatment, carries a high probability of actual statin initiation, and can be identified with sufficient temporal precision in administrative data. This approach should reduce channeling bias, selection bias (e.g., immortal time bias) and residual confounding in future target trial emulations. C_LIO_LIBroader Significance: The study provides an empirically derived, high-probability time zero event that can strengthen future target trial emulations using real-world data to assess the safety of commonly used medicines in older adults, a population often underrepresented in randomized trials to obtain regulatory approval. C_LI PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYThis study aimed to identify a clear starting point for future research on the safety of atorvastatin in older adults. Using Medicare claims data from 2018-2019, researchers examined more than 1.3 million beneficiaries aged 65 and older who had not previously taken statins in the last year. They developed a predictive model to determine which patient characteristics were most strongly linked to starting atorvastatin. The strongest predictors were a recent hospital admission for heart attack (myocardial infarction) or stroke (cerebral infarction). These events were associated with a much higher chance of promptly receiving atorvastatin, which aligns with American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines recommending statin therapy soon after such events for secondary prevention. By using hospital discharge after these acute events as the starting point for future studies, researchers can create comparisons that reduce bias and allow more reliable estimates of atorvastatins effects on potential harms in this vulnerable elderly population.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
The American Journal of Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.0%
2
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
8.3%
3
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
8.1%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.8%
5
Heart
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.3%
6
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.3%
7
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
8
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.9%
9
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
42 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
10
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.9%
11
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
12
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
13
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.3%
14
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
15
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.9%
16
Canadian Medical Association Journal
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
17
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
18
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
19
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
20
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
21
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
22
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
23
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
24
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.2%
25
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
26
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
27
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
29
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
30
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
14 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%