Dougall Dominic, Johnson Anthony, Goldsmith Kimberley, Sharpe Michael, Angus Brian, Chalder Trudie, White Peter
East London Foundation NHS Trust, London, UK.
MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK.
J Psychosom Res. 2014 Jul;77(1):20-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.04.002. Epub 2014 Apr 22.
Adverse events (AEs) are health related events, reported by participants in clinical trials. We describe AEs in the PACE trial of treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and baseline characteristics associated with them.
AEs were recorded on three occasions over one year in 641 participants. We compared the numbers and nature of AEs between treatment arms of specialist medical care (SMC) alone, or SMC supplemented by adaptive pacing therapy (APT), cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) or graded exercise therapy (GET). We examined associations with baseline measures by binary logistic regression analyses, and compared the proportions of participants who deteriorated by clinically important amounts.
Serious adverse events and reactions were infrequent. Non-serious adverse events were common; the median (quartiles) number was 4 (2, 8) per participant, with no significant differences between treatments (P=.47). A greater number of NSAEs were associated with recruitment centre, and baseline physical symptom count, body mass index, and depressive disorder. Physical function deteriorated in 39 (25%) participants after APT, 15 (9%) after CBT, 18 (11%) after GET, and 28 (18%) after SMC (P<.001), with no significant differences in worsening fatigue.
The numbers of adverse events did not differ significantly between trial treatments, but physical deterioration occurred most often after APT. The reporting of non-serious adverse events may reflect the nature of the illness rather than the effect of treatments. Differences between centres suggest that both standardisation of ascertainment methods and training are important when collecting adverse event data.
不良事件(AE)是临床试验参与者报告的与健康相关的事件。我们描述了慢性疲劳综合征(CFS)治疗的PACE试验中的不良事件及其相关的基线特征。
在641名参与者中,于一年时间内分三次记录不良事件。我们比较了单纯专科医疗护理(SMC)治疗组与补充了适应性 pacing 疗法(APT)、认知行为疗法(CBT)或分级运动疗法(GET)的 SMC 治疗组之间不良事件的数量和性质。我们通过二元逻辑回归分析研究了与基线测量值的关联,并比较了临床恶化程度达到重要水平的参与者比例。
严重不良事件和反应并不常见。非严重不良事件很常见;每位参与者的中位数(四分位数)为4(2,8),各治疗组之间无显著差异(P = 0.47)。更多的非严重不良事件与招募中心、基线身体症状计数、体重指数和抑郁症有关。APT 治疗后39名(25%)参与者的身体功能恶化,CBT 治疗后15名(9%),GET 治疗后18名(11%),SMC 治疗后28名(18%)(P < 0.001),疲劳加重方面无显著差异。
各试验治疗组之间不良事件的数量无显著差异,但 APT 治疗后身体恶化最为常见。非严重不良事件的报告可能反映了疾病的性质而非治疗效果。中心之间的差异表明,在收集不良事件数据时,确定方法的标准化和培训都很重要。