Literature DB >> 23348922

Do open label blinded outcome studies of novel anticoagulants versus warfarin have equivalent validity to those carried out under double-blind conditions?

William M O'Neil1, Sharon A Welner, Gregory Y H Lip.   

Abstract

Recent anticoagulants for stroke prevention in AF have been tested in active comparator controlled studies versus warfarin using two designs: double-blind, double-dummy and prospective randomised, open blinded endpoint (PROBE). The former requires elaborate procedures to maintain blinding, while PROBE does not. Outcomes of double-blind and PROBE designed studies of novel anticoagulants for AF, focusing on warfarin controls, were explored. Major, Phase III warfarin-controlled trials for stroke prevention in AF were identified. Odds ratios (ORs) of key outcomes for active comparators versus VKA and event rates for VKA arms were compared between designs, in context of baseline demographics and inclusion criteria. Identified trials studied five novel anticoagulants in three each of PROBE and double-blind design. For ORs of results across studies and outcomes, there was little pattern differentiating the two designs. Among VKA-control subjects, event rates for the primary outcome (stroke or systemic embolism) in PROBE trials at 1.74 %/year (95% confidence interval: 1.54-1.95) was not significantly different from that in double-blind trials, at 1.88 (1.73-2.03). Among other outcomes, VKA-treated subjects in both trial designs had similar event rates, apart from higher all-cause mortality in ROCKET AF, and lower myocardial infarction rates among the PROBE study patients. Although there are differences in outcome between PROBE and double blind trials, they do not appear to be design-related. The exacting requirements of double-blinding in AF trials may not be necessary.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23348922     DOI: 10.1160/TH12-10-0715

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 0340-6245            Impact factor:   5.249


  5 in total

Review 1.  Trials of implantable monitoring devices in heart failure: which design is optimal?

Authors:  William T Abraham; Wendy G Stough; Ileana L Piña; Cecilia Linde; Jeffrey S Borer; Gaetano M De Ferrari; Roxana Mehran; Kenneth M Stein; Alphons Vincent; Jay S Yadav; Stefan D Anker; Faiez Zannad
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 2.  Novel oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Graeme J Hankey; John W Eikelboom
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 5.113

3.  Xingnaojing for Moderate-to-severe Acute ischemic Stroke (XMAS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Xinxing Lai; Kegang Cao; Lingbo Kong; Qiang Liu; Ying Gao
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Efficacy and safety of Bujing Yishi tablet for glaucoma with controlled IOP: study protocol for a multi-centre randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Hongji Liu; Xiang Li; Zongduan Zhang; Jieping Zeng; Yan Dai; Chao Wang; Zhao Xie; Lin Cheng; Linru Cui
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Restart TICrH: An Adaptive Randomized Trial of Time Intervals to Restart Direct Oral Anticoagulants after Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage.

Authors:  Truman J Milling; Steven Warach; S Claiborne Johnston; Byron Gajewski; Todd Costantini; Michelle Price; Jo Wick; Simin Roward; Dinesh Mudaranthakam; Adrienne N Dula; Ben King; Alexander Muddiman; Gregory Y H Lip
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2021-04-06       Impact factor: 4.869

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.