Evidence Hub

Performance of the Self-Controlled Case Series With Active Comparators for Drug Safety Signal Detection Using Merative MarketScan Research Databases

Coste A, Wong AYS, Haguinet F, Bate A, Douglas IJ

Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

Background: Despite testing of epidemiological methods in US Claims databases for signal detection, such data sources have not become a routine capability. The Self Controlled Case Series (SCCS) is one of the most promising methods for drug safety signal detection using Real World Data, and incorporating active comparators could potentially improve its performance by addressing confounding by indication.

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the performance of the SCCS with and without active comparators for signal detection using US Merative MarketScan Commercial Claims and Medicare databases.

Methods: We applied the SCCS to macrolide and fluoroquinolone antibiotics, using amoxicillin and cefalexin as active comparators. In total, 7 drugs and 30 outcomes from all organ classes were selected. We developed a reference set of 104 positive controls and 58 negative controls, using a taxonomy framework to ensure the selected drug outcome pairs are theoretically well suited to the SCCS design. A two-year observation period with a 30-day risk window after each dispensing was used. Diagnostic performance was measured using sensitivity and specificity with respect to the product labels.

Results: The SCCS without active comparators achieved sensitivities of 0.73 and 0.72 and specificities of 0.68 and 0.62 in commercial and Medicare claims, respectively, for pairs with sufficient power. Active comparators increased specificity up to 0.84 and 0.86, respectively, in Commercial Claims…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free