Age, risk-benefit trade-offs, and the projected effects of evidence-based therapies

被引:71
|
作者
Alter, DA
Manuel, DG
Gunraj, N
Anderson, G
Naylor, CD
Laupacis, A
机构
[1] Inst Clin Evaluat Sci, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Clin Epidemiol & Hlth Care Res Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Sunnybrook & Womens Coll, Hlth Sci Ctr, Schulich Heart Ctr, Div Cardiol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Sunnybrook & Womens Coll, Hlth Sci Ctr, Div Gen Internal Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Toronto, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Univ Toronto, Dept Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] Univ Toronto, Deans Off, Toronto, ON, Canada
来源
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE | 2004年 / 116卷 / 08期
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.10.039
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Physicians underutilize evidence-based therapies in the elderly, perhaps because of concerns about the generalizability of clinical trial results in elderly patients given that the relative efficacy of therapies may vary with age. We compared the estimated effects of age and efficacy of treatment on survival among patients with acute coronary syndromes. METHODS: Baseline risk, defined as mortality in the year after hospitalization for acute coronary syndromes, was determined for different age strata among 81,584 patients who had been discharged between April 1, 1997, and March 31, 2000, in Ontario, Canada. We calculated the relative efficacy (relative risk reduction) needed to achieve a clinically meaningful absolute survival benefit, using a number needed to treat of 50 patients for the different age strata. We also evaluated risk-benefit tradeoffs in the elderly versus the young by modeling different levels of the relative efficacy and rates of fatal complication by age. RESULTS: Baseline risk (1-year all-cause mortality) was 12-fold lower in the youngest patients (age <50 years) than in oldest patients (age greater than or equal to75 years). Given this gradient, a therapy would have to have a relative efficacy of 88% (i.e., a relative risk of 0.12) in the youngest age group, and 7% (a relative risk of 0.93) in the oldest age group, to generate a number needed to treat 50 patients. For a therapy whose relative efficacy was 25%, the fatal complication rate would have to be sevenfold greater in the oldest compared with the youngest age group to outweigh the survival benefits associated with treatment. CONCLUSION: For acute coronary syndromes, baseline mortality is so much higher for elderly patients that neither sharp reductions in the relative efficacy of therapies nor increases in the rates of serious complications are likely to negate the benefits of therapy. More attention should be paid to overall trial results and less to age-specific subgroup data, unless the latter provide very clear evidence for substantial reductions in absolute efficacy or net harm. (C) 2004 by Excerpta Medica Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:540 / 545
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] PATIENT PREFERENCES: UNDERSTANDING RISK-BENEFIT TRADE-OFFS OF GENOMIC TESTING IN CHEMOTHERAPY DECISIONS FOR BREAST CANCER PATIENTS
    Marshall, D.
    Bombard, Y.
    Trudeau, M.
    Leighl, N.
    Pykerman, K.
    Deal, K.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2013, 16 (03) : A147 - A148
  • [12] Benefit–Risk or Risk–Benefit Trade-Offs? Another Look at Attribute Ordering Effects in a Pilot Choice Experiment
    Sebastian Heidenreich
    Andrea Phillips-Beyer
    Bruno Flamion
    Melissa Ross
    Jaein Seo
    Kevin Marsh
    The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2021, 14 : 65 - 74
  • [13] An evidence-based risk-benefit assessment of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab in psoriasis
    Strober, Bruce
    Langley, Richard
    Rozzo, Stephen
    Gu, Yihua
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY, 2009, 60 (03) : AB167 - AB167
  • [14] Patient centered decision making: Use of conjoint analysis to determine risk-benefit trade-offs for preference sensitive treatment choices
    Wilson, Leslie
    Loucks, Aimee
    Bui, Christine
    Gipson, Greg
    Zhong, Lixian
    Schwartzburg, Amy
    Crabtree, Elizabeth
    Goodin, Douglas
    Waubant, Emmanuelle
    McCulloch, Charles
    JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2014, 344 (1-2) : 80 - 87
  • [15] First-line treatment options for metastatic egfr mutant lung cancer-an assessment of risk-benefit trade-offs
    Zhou, Deborah
    Francis, Katherine
    Dalrymple, Janene
    Lord, Sally
    Gebski, Val
    Chee, Chee
    ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2021, 17 : 26 - 26
  • [16] Differences in the strengths of evidence matters in risk-risk trade-offs
    Sahlin, Ullrika
    Rundlof, Maj
    JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH, 2017, 20 (08) : 988 - 994
  • [17] Risk/benefit trade-offs in rheumatology: rofecoxib revisited in the era of JAK inhibitors
    Hazlewood, Glen S.
    RHEUMATOLOGY, 2023, 62 (12) : 3773 - 3775
  • [18] ADAPTIVE PLASTICITY IN HATCHING AGE - A RESPONSE TO PREDATION RISK TRADE-OFFS
    WARKENTIN, KM
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 1995, 92 (08) : 3507 - 3510
  • [19] Treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer in the elderly: navigating the trade-offs of risk and benefit
    Noam A. VanderWalde
    Michelle T. Chi
    Arti Hurria
    Matthew D. Galsky
    Matthew E. Nielsen
    World Journal of Urology, 2016, 34 : 3 - 11
  • [20] Effect of Various Risk/Benefit Trade-offs on Parents' Understanding of a Pediatric Research Study
    Tait, Alan R.
    Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J.
    Fagerlin, Angela
    Voepel-Lewis, Terri
    PEDIATRICS, 2010, 125 (06) : E1475 - E1482