Literature DB >> 11223323

When should an effective treatment be used? Derivation of the threshold number needed to treat and the minimum event rate for treatment.

J C Sinclair1, R J Cook, G H Guyatt, S G Pauker, D J Cook.   

Abstract

Clinicians and patients must decide when treatment effects are large enough to more than offset the adverse effects and costs of therapy. Calculation of the number of patients one needs to treat (NNT) in order to prevent one patient from having the target event is one tool to help with this decision. Clinicians should treat patients when the NNT is lower than a threshold NNT at which point the therapeutic risk equals the therapeutic benefit. We aimed: (1) to identify the determinants of the threshold NNT, and (2) to derive equations for the explicit estimation of the threshold NNT and of the minimum expected rate of target event, without treatment, above which treatment is justified. We conceived the threshold number needed to treat to prevent one target event as the point at which the benefits of treating that number of patients equal the negative consequences of treating that same number of patients. After identifying the various elements comprising the treatment impact, we equated the benefits and negative consequences and solved the equation for threshold NNT. We then derived the minimum expected rate of target event which would justify treatment. We derived an equation that relates the threshold NNT to the treatment-attributable adverse event rates (AER) and the relative values (RV) of the adverse events compared to that of the target event prevented. Specifically, the threshold NNT, denoted NNT(T) is given by NNT(T) = 1/(AER(1).RV(1) +...+ AER(n).RV(n)). We also derived a more complex equation which addresses the costs incurred by treatment and costs avoided by preventing target events. Solving the equation that includes costs requires specifying both the value of preventing a target event and the values of adverse treatment effects in economic units. The threshold NNT and the relative risk reduction (RRR) for the target event determine the minimum target event rate above which treatment is justified. This minimum event rate for treatment is 1/(NNT(T).RRR). The values that clinicians and patients use determine the threshold NNT and therefore also the minimum target event rate, without treatment, above which treatment is justified. Quantification of the determinants of the threshold NNT and of the minimum event rate to justify treatment can assist clinicians and patients in the explicit use of underlying values when making treatment decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11223323     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00347-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  27 in total

Review 1.  Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 1. Relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat.

Authors:  Alexandra Barratt; Peter C Wyer; Rose Hatala; Thomas McGinn; Antonio L Dans; Sheri Keitz; Virginia Moyer; Gordon Guyatt For
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-08-17       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  The international intravitreal bevacizumab safety survey.

Authors:  F Ziemssen; S Grisanti; K U Bartz-Schmidt
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Medical decision making and the importance of baseline risk.

Authors:  Steven D Stovitz; Ian Shrier
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Timing of HAART initiation and clinical outcomes in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 seroconverters.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2011-09-26

5.  Adjusting for covariates in evaluating markers for selecting treatment, with application to guiding chemotherapy for treating estrogen-receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Holly Janes; Marshall D Brown; Michael R Crager; Dave P Miller; William E Barlow
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  Variation among institutional review boards in evaluating the design of a multicenter randomized trial.

Authors:  A R Stark; J E Tyson; P L Hibberd
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2009-10-01       Impact factor: 2.521

Review 7.  Inconclusive evidence for the efficacy of tranexamic acid in reducing transfusions, postoperative infection or hematoma formation after primary shoulder arthroplasty: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

Authors:  Jorge Rojas; Uma Srikumaran; Edward G McFarland
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2020-01-13

8.  Quantifying the impact of community quarantine on SARS transmission in Ontario: estimation of secondary case count difference and number needed to quarantine.

Authors:  Susan J Bondy; Margaret L Russell; Julie Ml Laflèche; Elizabeth Rea
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Patient's preferences for health scenarios associated with hepatitis C and its treatment.

Authors:  Fabio Tinè
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2009-12-29       Impact factor: 2.711

10.  Clinical benefits of a multivariate prediction model for bladder cancer: a decision analytic approach.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Angel M Cronin; Michael W Kattan; Mithat Gonen; Peter T Scardino; Matthew I Milowsky; Guido Dalbagni; Bernard H Bochner
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.