Literature DB >> 16264162

Randomized trials stopped early for benefit: a systematic review.

Victor M Montori1, P J Devereaux, Neill K J Adhikari, Karen E A Burns, Christoph H Eggert, Matthias Briel, Christina Lacchetti, Teresa W Leung, Elizabeth Darling, Dianne M Bryant, Heiner C Bucher, Holger J Schünemann, Maureen O Meade, Deborah J Cook, Patricia J Erwin, Amit Sood, Richa Sood, Benjamin Lo, Carly A Thompson, Qi Zhou, Edward Mills, Gordon H Guyatt.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that stop earlier than planned because of apparent benefit often receive great attention and affect clinical practice. Their prevalence, the magnitude and plausibility of their treatment effects, and the extent to which they report information about how investigators decided to stop early are, however, unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the epidemiology and reporting quality of RCTs involving interventions stopped early for benefit. DATA SOURCES: Systematic review up to November 2004 of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, and full-text journal content databases to identify RCTs stopped early for benefit. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials of any intervention reported as having stopped early because of results favoring the intervention. There were no exclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Twelve reviewers working independently and in duplicate abstracted data on content area and type of intervention tested, reporting of funding, type of end point driving study termination, treatment effect, length of follow-up, estimated sample size and total sample studied, role of a data and safety monitoring board in stopping the study, number of interim analyses planned and conducted, and existence and type of monitoring methods, statistical boundaries, and adjustment procedures for interim analyses and early stopping. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 143 RCTs stopped early for benefit, the majority (92) were published in 5 high-impact medical journals. Typically, these were industry-funded drug trials in cardiology, cancer, and human immunodeficiency virus/AIDS. The proportion of all RCTs published in high-impact journals that were stopped early for benefit increased from 0.5% in 1990-1994 to 1.2% in 2000-2004 (P<.001 for trend). On average, RCTs recruited 63% (SD, 25%) of the planned sample and stopped after a median of 13 (interquartile range [IQR], 3-25) months of follow-up, 1 interim analysis, and when a median of 66 (IQR, 23-195) patients had experienced the end point driving study termination (event). The median risk ratio among truncated RCTs was 0.53 (IQR, 0.28-0.66). One hundred thirty-five (94%) of the 143 RCTs did not report at least 1 of the following: the planned sample size (n = 28), the interim analysis after which the trial was stopped (n = 45), whether a stopping rule informed the decision (n = 48), or an adjusted analysis accounting for interim monitoring and truncation (n = 129). Trials with fewer events yielded greater treatment effects (odds ratio, 28; 95% confidence interval, 11-73).
CONCLUSIONS: RCTs stopped early for benefit are becoming more common, often fail to adequately report relevant information about the decision to stop early, and show implausibly large treatment effects, particularly when the number of events is small. These findings suggest clinicians should view the results of such trials with skepticism.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16264162     DOI: 10.1001/jama.294.17.2203

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  139 in total

1.  Putting ACCOMPLISH into context: management of hypertension in 2010.

Authors:  Finlay A McAlister; Robert J Herman; Nadia A Khan; Simon W Rabkin; Norm Campbell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Is acute respiratory distress syndrome an iatrogenic disease?

Authors:  Jesús Villar; Arthur S Slutsky
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2010-02-16       Impact factor: 9.097

3.  Treating hypertension in the very elderly.

Authors:  G Michael Allan; Laurie Mallery; Noah Ivers
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Heparin in pregnant women with previous placenta-mediated pregnancy complications: a prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Ida Martinelli; Piero Ruggenenti; Irene Cetin; Giorgio Pardi; Annalisa Perna; Patrizia Vergani; Barbara Acaia; Fabio Facchinetti; Giovanni Battista La Sala; Maddalena Bozzo; Stefania Rampello; Luca Marozio; Olimpia Diadei; Giulia Gherardi; Sergio Carminati; Giuseppe Remuzzi; Pier Mannuccio Mannucci
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2012-01-30       Impact factor: 22.113

5.  CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

Authors:  David Moher; Sally Hopewell; Kenneth F Schulz; Victor Montori; Peter C Gøtzsche; P J Devereaux; Diana Elbourne; Matthias Egger; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

6.  Transcutaneous nicotine does not prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Christoph Czarnetzki; Eduardo Schiffer; Christopher Lysakowski; Guy Haller; Daniel Bertrand; Martin R Tramèr
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 7.  A primer on data safety monitoring boards: mission, methods, and controversies.

Authors:  Lisa K Hicks; Andreas Laupacis; Arthur S Slutsky
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-07-28       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 8.  Do we learn the right things from clinical trials?

Authors:  Silvio Garattini; Vittorio Bertele'
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2008-01-29       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 9.  Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for unipolar depression: a systematic review of classic long-term randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Dorian Deshauer; David Moher; Dean Fergusson; Ester Moher; Margaret Sampson; Jeremy Grimshaw
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-05-06       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 10.  Reducing the burden of acute respiratory distress syndrome: the case for early intervention and the potential role of the emergency department.

Authors:  Brian M Fuller; Nicholas M Mohr; Richard S Hotchkiss; Marin H Kollef
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 3.454

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.