Literature DB >> 35031947

A Comparison of Individuals with Diabetes and EMPA-REG Trial Participants: Exploring Aspects of External Validity.

Alexander Chaitoff1, Joshua D Niforatos2, Jingyi Gong3, Michael A Fischer4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is increasing use of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to treat diabetes. Since trials apply specific entry and exclusion criteria to ensure internal validity, comparisons of trial populations with nationally representative samples can inform the applicability of study findings to practice.
OBJECTIVE: To compare individuals with diabetes from a nationally representative sample to patients who underwent randomization in the EMPA-REG trial. A secondary aim was to characterize what proportion of individuals prescribed an SGLT2 inhibitor in a nationally representative sample would have been included in the EMPA-REG trial.
DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with diabetes who took part in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) between 2011-2014 (primary analysis corresponding to EMPA-REG enrollment) and 2015-2018 (secondary analysis corresponding to contemporary sample). MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a comparison of demographic (age, sex, ethnicity, and pregnancy status), clinical (comorbidities and medication use), examination (weight, body mass index, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure), and laboratory (hgba1c, low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and estimated glomerular filtration rate) characteristics of NHANES respondents versus EMPA-REG trial participants. The secondary outcome was the proportion of NHANES respondents who had been prescribed an SGLT2 inhibitor that would have met inclusion criteria for the EMPA-REG trial. KEY
RESULTS: There were 655 and 48 respondents, representing a weighted sample of 21,849,775 and 1,062,573 individuals, included in the primary and secondary analyses, respectively. Overall, 7.6% (95% CI 4.8-10.6%) of 2011-2014 NHANES respondents would have met all EMPA-REG trial inclusion criteria. NHANES respondents and EMPA-REG participants differed across demographic, clinical, examination, and laboratory domains. Of NHANES respondents from 2015 to 2018 who were prescribed an SGLT2 inhibitor, 10.6% (95% CI <1-24.7%) would have met all inclusion criteria for the EMPA-REG trial.
CONCLUSIONS: The EMPA-REG population differed from a nationally representative sample, which could affect generalizability.
© 2021. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical trials; diabetes; external validity; generalizability; sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35031947      PMCID: PMC9411404          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-021-07284-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   6.473


  31 in total

Review 1.  Generalizing results of randomized trials to clinical practice: reliability and cautions.

Authors:  Marcus Flather; Nicola Delahunty; Julian Collinson
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.486

2.  How to assess the external validity of therapeutic trials: a conceptual approach.

Authors:  O M Dekkers; E von Elm; A Algra; J A Romijn; J P Vandenbroucke
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-04-17       Impact factor: 7.196

3.  Why representativeness should be avoided.

Authors:  Kenneth J Rothman; John E J Gallacher; Elizabeth E Hatch
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  False alarms and pseudo-epidemics: the limitations of observational epidemiology.

Authors:  David A Grimes; Kenneth F Schulz
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Empagliflozin, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Bernard Zinman; Christoph Wanner; John M Lachin; David Fitchett; Erich Bluhmki; Stefan Hantel; Michaela Mattheus; Theresa Devins; Odd Erik Johansen; Hans J Woerle; Uli C Broedl; Silvio E Inzucchi
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-09-17       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Generalizability of Cardiovascular Safety Trials on SGLT2 Inhibitors to the Real World: Implications for Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Antonio Nicolucci; Riccardo Candido; Domenico Cucinotta; Giusi Graziano; Alberto Rocca; Maria C Rossi; Franco Tuccinardi; Valeria Manicardi
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 3.845

Review 7.  Generalizability of findings from randomized controlled trials is limited in the leading general medical journals.

Authors:  Antti Malmivaara
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2018-11-17       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities.

Authors:  Vivek H Murthy; Harlan M Krumholz; Cary P Gross
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Eligibility varies among the 4 sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor cardiovascular outcomes trials: implications for the general type 2 diabetes US population.

Authors:  Eric T Wittbrodt; James M Eudicone; Kelly F Bell; Devin M Enhoffer; Keith Latham; Jennifer B Green
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.229

10.  Generalizability of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist cardiovascular outcome trials to the overall type 2 diabetes population in the United States.

Authors:  Kristina S Boye; Matthew C Riddle; Hertzel C Gerstein; Reema Mody; Luis-Emilio Garcia-Perez; Chrisanthi A Karanikas; Maureen J Lage; Jeffrey S Riesmeyer; Mark C Lakshmanan
Journal:  Diabetes Obes Metab       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 6.577

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.