Literature DB >> 20620768

Inherent problems with randomized clinical trials with observational/no treatment arms.

Clifford J Buckley1, Robert B Rutherford, Edward B Diethrich, Shirley D Buckley.   

Abstract

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) offering an observation/no treatment (OBS/NoRx) arm as control and which are focused on the management of a condition with potentially life-threatening consequences, however small the risk, often experience a significant rate of crossover to treatment by those randomized to the OBS/NoRx arm. Results of these trials when analyzed on intent-to-treat basis often fail to resolve the issue at which they were directed. The authors have observed this in trials of abdominal aortic aneurysms with this design and use these to exemplify the dilemmas RCTs of such design create, with crossovers ranging from 27% to over 60% (EVAR II, UKSAT, ADAM, PIVOTAL). Results of these trials are frequently used as level I medical evidence and their potential impact on clinical decision making and reimbursement can be quite significant and long-lasting. Recommendations regarding trial end points and suggestions to mitigate the high crossover effect are offered. It may be that some clinical conditions dealing with potentially life-threatening problems should not be studied in randomized prospective clinical trials containing an OBS/NoRx arm. Published by Mosby, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20620768     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.02.255

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  6 in total

1.  Current Endovascular Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

Authors:  April A Grant; Stephen L Chastain; Bruce H Gray
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-01-29       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Intended versus inferred care after PET performed for initial staging in the National Oncologic PET Registry.

Authors:  Bruce E Hillner; Anna N Tosteson; Tor D Tosteson; Qianfei Wang; Yunjie Song; Lucy G Hanna; Barry A Siegel
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  ASO Author Reflections: Induced Bias Due to Crossover Within Randomized Controlled Trials in Surgical Oncology.

Authors:  George Garas
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-09-20       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 4.  Why I use both prospective randomized trials and registry data when choosing the personalized treatment of an AAA patient.

Authors:  M D Shah; S Edeiken; R C Darling Iii
Journal:  Gefasschirurgie       Date:  2018-08-09

Review 5.  Induced Bias Due to Crossover Within Randomized Controlled Trials in Surgical Oncology: A Meta-regression Analysis of Minimally Invasive versus Open Surgery for the Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancer.

Authors:  George Garas; Sheraz R Markar; George Malietzis; Hutan Ashrafian; George B Hanna; Emmanouil Zacharakis; Long R Jiao; Athanassios Argiris; Ara Darzi; Thanos Athanasiou
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Strategies to Improve Recruitment to a De-escalation Trial: A Mixed-Methods Study of the OPTIMA Prelim Trial in Early Breast Cancer.

Authors:  C Conefrey; J L Donovan; R C Stein; S Paramasivan; A Marshall; J Bartlett; D Cameron; A Campbell; J Dunn; H Earl; P Hall; V Harmer; L Hughes-Davies; I Macpherson; A Makris; A Morgan; S Pinder; C Poole; D Rea; L Rooshenas
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 4.126

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.