Treatment Effect in Earlier Trials of Patients With Chronic Medical Conditions: A Meta-Epidemiologic Study

被引:17
|
作者
Alahdab, Fares [1 ]
Farah, Wigdan [1 ]
Almasri, Jehad [1 ]
Barrionuevo, Patricia [1 ]
Zaiem, Feras [1 ]
Benkhadra, Raed [1 ]
Asi, Noor [1 ]
Alsawas, Mouaz [1 ]
Pang, Yifan [1 ]
Ahmed, Ahmed T. [1 ]
Rajjo, Tamim [1 ]
Kanwar, Amrit [1 ]
Benkhadra, Khalid [1 ]
Razouki, Zayd [1 ]
Murad, M. Hassan [1 ]
Wang, Zhen [1 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Robert D & Patricia E Kern Ctr Sci Hlth Care Deli, Rochester, MN USA
关键词
METAANALYSIS; BIAS;
D O I
10.1016/j.mayocp.2017.10.020
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: To determine whether the early trials in chronic medical conditions demonstrate an effect size that is larger than that in subsequent trials. Methods: We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating a drug or device in patients with chronic medical conditions through meta-analyses (MAs) published between January 1, 2007, and June 23, 2015, in the 10 general medical journals with highest impact factor. We estimated the prevalence of having the largest effect size or heterogeneity in the first 2 published trials. We evaluated the association of the exaggerated early effect with several a priori hypothesized explanatory variables. Results: We included 70 MAs that had included a total of 930 trials (average of 13 [range, 5-48] RCTs per MA) with average follow-up of 24 (range, 1-168) months. The prevalence of the exaggerated early effect (ie, proportion of MAs with largest effect or heterogeneity in the first 2 trials) was 37%. These early trials had an effect size that was on average 2.67 times larger than the overall pooled effect size (ratio of relative effects, 2.67; 95% CI, 2.12-3.37). The presence of exaggerated effect was not significantly associated with trial size; number of events; length of follow-up; intervention duration; number of study sites; inpatient versus outpatient setting; funding source; stopping a trial early; adequacy of random sequence generation, allocation concealment, or blinding; loss to follow-up or the test for publication bias. Conclusion: Trials evaluating treatments of chronic medical conditions published early in the chain of evidence commonly demonstrate an exaggerated treatment effect compared with subsequent trials. At the present time, this phenomenon remains unpredictable. Considering the increasing morbidity and mortality of chronic medical conditions, decision makers should act on early evidence with caution. (C) 2017 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
引用
收藏
页码:278 / 283
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Prevalence and Impact of Treatment Crossover in Cardiac Surgery Randomized Trials: A Meta-Epidemiologic Study
    Gaudino, Mario
    Fremes, Stephen E.
    Ruel, Marc
    Di Franco, Antonino
    Di Mauro, Michele
    Chikwe, Joanna
    Frati, Giacomo
    Girardi, Leonard N.
    Taggart, David P.
    Biondi-Zoccai, Giuseppe
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, 2019, 8 (21):
  • [2] Association Between Publication Characteristics and Treatment Effect Estimates A Meta-epidemiologic Study
    Dechartres, Agnes
    Atal, Ignacio
    Riveros, Carolina
    Meerpohl, Joerg
    Ravaud, Philippe
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2018, 169 (06) : 385 - +
  • [3] Sex and Gender Considerations in Randomized Controlled Trials in Adults Receiving Chronic Dialysis: A Meta-Epidemiologic Study
    Collister, David T.
    Pyne, Lonnie
    Bhasin, Arrti A.
    Ahmed, Sofia B.
    Smyth, Brendan
    Herrington, William G.
    Jardine, Meg
    Walsh, Michael
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY, 2022, 33 (11): : 266 - 266
  • [4] The Importance of Allocation Concealment and Patient Blinding in Osteoarthritis Trials: A Meta-Epidemiologic Study
    Nueesch, Eveline
    Reichenbach, Stephan
    Trelle, Sven
    Rutjes, Anne W. S.
    Liewald, Katharina
    Sterchi, Rebekka
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Jueni, Peter
    ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM-ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2009, 61 (12): : 1633 - 1641
  • [5] Single-Center Trials Show Larger Treatment Effects Than Multicenter Trials: Evidence From a Meta-epidemiologic Study
    Dechartres, Agnes
    Boutron, Isabelle
    Trinquart, Ludovic
    Charles, Pierre
    Ravaud, Philippe
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2011, 155 (01) : 39 - +
  • [6] Practices and impact of primary outcome adjustment in randomized controlled trials: meta-epidemiologic study
    Saquib, Nazmus
    Saquib, Juliann
    Ioannidis, John P. A.
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 347
  • [7] A meta-epidemiologic study of power and sample size in randomized controlled trials published in dermatology journals
    Bridgman, A.
    McPhie, M.
    Voineskos, S.
    Chan, A.
    Drucker, A. M.
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY, 2021, 141 (05) : S47 - S47
  • [8] Applicability of Vasopressor Trials in Adult Critical Care: A Prospective Multicentre Meta-Epidemiologic Cohort Study
    Buchtele, Nina
    Schwameis, Michael
    Roth, Dominik
    Schwameis, Franz
    Kraft, Felix
    Ullrich, Roman
    Muehlbacher, Jakob
    Laggner, Roberta
    Gamper, Gunnar
    Semmler, Georg
    Schoergenhofer, Christian
    Staudinger, Thomas
    Herkner, Harald
    CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 14 : 1087 - 1098
  • [9] Sex and Gender in Randomized Controlled Trials of Adults Receiving Maintenance Dialysis: A Meta-epidemiologic Study
    Collister, David
    Pyne, Lonnie
    Bhasin, Arrti A.
    Ahmed, Sotla B.
    Smyth, Brendan
    Herrington, William
    Jardine, Meg
    Walsh, Michael
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES, 2023, 81 (05) : 575 - 582.e1
  • [10] Heart failure events in randomized controlled trials for adults receiving maintenance dialysis: a meta-epidemiologic study
    Collister, David
    Pyne, Lonnie
    Bhasin, Arrti A.
    Smyth, Brendan
    Herrington, William
    Jardine, Meg
    Mark, Patrick B.
    Badve, Sunil
    Rossignol, Patrick
    Dember, Laura M.
    Wanner, Christoph
    Ezekowitz, Justin
    Devereaux, P. J.
    Parfrey, Patrick
    Gansevoort, Ron
    Walsh, Michael
    NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION, 2024,