When an entire cohort of patients receives a treatment, it is difficult to estimate the treatment effect in the treated because there are no directly comparable untreated patients. Attempts can be made to find a suitable control group (e.g., historical controls), but underlying differences between the treated and untreated can result in bias. Here we show how negative control outcomes combined with difference-in-differences analysis can be used to assess bias in treatment effect estimates and obtain unbiased estimates under certain assumptions. Causal diagrams and potential outcomes are used to explain the methods and assumptions. We apply the methods to UK Cystic Fibrosis Registry data to investigate the effect of ivacaftor, introduced in 2012 for a subset of the cystic fibrosis population with a particular genotype, on lung function and annual rate (days/year) of receiving intravenous (IV) antibiotics (i.e., IV days). We consider 2 negative control outcomes: outcomes measured in the pre-ivacaftor period and outcomes among persons ineligible for ivacaftor because of their genotype. Ivacaftor was found to improve lung function in year 1 (an approximately 6.5–percentage-point increase in ppFEV1), was associated with reduced lung function decline (an approximately 0.5–percentage-point decrease in annual ppFEV1 decline, though confidence intervals included 0), and reduced the annual rate of IV days (approximately 60% over 3 years).