Suppr超能文献

因有益而提前终止的随机试验:一项系统评价

Randomized trials stopped early for benefit: a systematic review.

作者信息

Montori Victor M, Devereaux P J, Adhikari Neill K J, Burns Karen E A, Eggert Christoph H, Briel Matthias, Lacchetti Christina, Leung Teresa W, Darling Elizabeth, Bryant Dianne M, Bucher Heiner C, Schünemann Holger J, Meade Maureen O, Cook Deborah J, Erwin Patricia J, Sood Amit, Sood Richa, Lo Benjamin, Thompson Carly A, Zhou Qi, Mills Edward, Guyatt Gordon H

机构信息

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

JAMA. 2005 Nov 2;294(17):2203-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.17.2203.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that stop earlier than planned because of apparent benefit often receive great attention and affect clinical practice. Their prevalence, the magnitude and plausibility of their treatment effects, and the extent to which they report information about how investigators decided to stop early are, however, unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the epidemiology and reporting quality of RCTs involving interventions stopped early for benefit.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic review up to November 2004 of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, and full-text journal content databases to identify RCTs stopped early for benefit.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of any intervention reported as having stopped early because of results favoring the intervention. There were no exclusion criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

Twelve reviewers working independently and in duplicate abstracted data on content area and type of intervention tested, reporting of funding, type of end point driving study termination, treatment effect, length of follow-up, estimated sample size and total sample studied, role of a data and safety monitoring board in stopping the study, number of interim analyses planned and conducted, and existence and type of monitoring methods, statistical boundaries, and adjustment procedures for interim analyses and early stopping.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 143 RCTs stopped early for benefit, the majority (92) were published in 5 high-impact medical journals. Typically, these were industry-funded drug trials in cardiology, cancer, and human immunodeficiency virus/AIDS. The proportion of all RCTs published in high-impact journals that were stopped early for benefit increased from 0.5% in 1990-1994 to 1.2% in 2000-2004 (P<.001 for trend). On average, RCTs recruited 63% (SD, 25%) of the planned sample and stopped after a median of 13 (interquartile range [IQR], 3-25) months of follow-up, 1 interim analysis, and when a median of 66 (IQR, 23-195) patients had experienced the end point driving study termination (event). The median risk ratio among truncated RCTs was 0.53 (IQR, 0.28-0.66). One hundred thirty-five (94%) of the 143 RCTs did not report at least 1 of the following: the planned sample size (n = 28), the interim analysis after which the trial was stopped (n = 45), whether a stopping rule informed the decision (n = 48), or an adjusted analysis accounting for interim monitoring and truncation (n = 129). Trials with fewer events yielded greater treatment effects (odds ratio, 28; 95% confidence interval, 11-73).

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs stopped early for benefit are becoming more common, often fail to adequately report relevant information about the decision to stop early, and show implausibly large treatment effects, particularly when the number of events is small. These findings suggest clinicians should view the results of such trials with skepticism.

摘要

背景

因明显益处而提前终止的随机临床试验(RCT)往往备受关注并影响临床实践。然而,它们的发生率、治疗效果的大小和可信度,以及它们报告研究者决定提前终止的相关信息的程度尚不清楚。

目的

评估因益处而提前终止干预措施的随机临床试验的流行病学情况和报告质量。

数据来源

截至2004年11月对MEDLINE、EMBASE、《现刊目次》和全文期刊内容数据库进行系统综述,以识别因益处而提前终止的随机临床试验。

研究选择

任何干预措施的随机临床试验,报告因结果有利于干预措施而提前终止。无排除标准。

数据提取

12名评审员独立且重复地提取关于所测试干预措施的内容领域和类型、资金报告、推动研究终止的终点类型、治疗效果、随访时长、估计样本量和研究的总样本量、数据与安全监测委员会在终止研究中的作用、计划和进行的中期分析数量,以及中期分析和提前终止的监测方法、统计界限和调整程序的存在情况及类型等数据。

数据综合

在143项因益处而提前终止的随机临床试验中,大多数(92项)发表于5种高影响力医学期刊。通常,这些是由行业资助的心脏病学、癌症和人类免疫缺陷病毒/艾滋病药物试验。1990 - 1994年在高影响力期刊上发表的所有随机临床试验中因益处而提前终止的比例为0.5%,2000 - 2004年增至1.2%(趋势P<0.001)。平均而言,随机临床试验招募了计划样本量的63%(标准差,25%),在中位随访13(四分位间距[IQR],3 - 25)个月、进行1次中期分析且中位66(IQR,23 - 195)名患者经历推动研究终止的终点(事件)后终止。截尾随机临床试验的中位风险比为0.53(IQR,0.28 - 0.66)。143项随机临床试验中有135项(94%)未报告以下至少一项:计划样本量(n = 28)、试验终止前的中期分析(n = 45)、是否有终止规则指导该决定(n = 48)或考虑中期监测和截尾的调整分析(n = 129)。事件较少的试验产生的治疗效果更大(优势比,28;95%置信区间,11 - 73)。

结论

因益处而提前终止的随机临床试验越来越常见,往往未能充分报告关于提前终止决定的相关信息,且显示出难以置信的大治疗效果,尤其是当事件数量较少时。这些发现表明临床医生应怀疑地看待此类试验的结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验