Unkel Steffen, Röver Christian, Stallard Nigel, Benda Norbert, Posch Martin, Zohar Sarah, Friede Tim
Department of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Humboldtallee 32, 37073, Göttingen, Germany.
Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2016 Feb 20;11:16. doi: 10.1186/s13023-016-0402-6.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard design of clinical research to assess interventions. However, RCTs cannot always be applied for practical or ethical reasons. To investigate the current practices in rare diseases, we review evaluations of therapeutic interventions in paediatric multiple sclerosis (MS) and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). In particular, we shed light on the endpoints used, the study designs implemented and the statistical methodologies applied.
We conducted literature searches to identify relevant primary studies. Data on study design, objectives, endpoints, patient characteristics, randomization and masking, type of intervention, control, withdrawals and statistical methodology were extracted from the selected studies. The risk of bias and the quality of the studies were assessed.
Twelve (seven) primary studies on paediatric MS (CJD) were included in the qualitative synthesis. No double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial for evaluating interventions in paediatric MS has been published yet. Evidence from one open-label RCT is available. The observational studies are before-after studies or controlled studies. Three of the seven selected studies on CJD are RCTs, of which two received the maximum mark on the Oxford Quality Scale. Four trials are controlled observational studies.
Evidence from double-blind RCTs on the efficacy of treatments appears to be variable between rare diseases. With regard to paediatric conditions it remains to be seen what impact regulators will have through e.g., paediatric investigation plans. Overall, there is space for improvement by using innovative trial designs and data analysis techniques.
随机对照试验(RCTs)是评估干预措施的临床研究的金标准设计。然而,由于实际或伦理原因,RCTs并不总是适用。为了调查罕见病的当前实践情况,我们回顾了小儿多发性硬化症(MS)和克雅氏病(CJD)治疗干预措施的评估。特别是,我们阐明了所使用的终点、实施的研究设计和应用的统计方法。
我们进行了文献检索以识别相关的原始研究。从选定的研究中提取有关研究设计、目标、终点、患者特征、随机化和设盲、干预类型、对照、退出和统计方法的数据。评估研究的偏倚风险和质量。
定性综合分析纳入了12项(7项)关于小儿MS(CJD)的原始研究。尚未发表用于评估小儿MS干预措施的双盲、随机安慰剂对照试验。有一项开放标签RCT的证据。观察性研究为前后对照研究或对照研究。所选的7项关于CJD的研究中有3项是RCT,其中两项在牛津质量量表上获得了最高分。四项试验为对照观察性研究。
双盲RCT关于治疗效果的证据在罕见病之间似乎存在差异。对于儿科疾病,监管机构通过例如儿科研究计划将产生何种影响仍有待观察。总体而言,通过使用创新的试验设计和数据分析技术仍有改进空间。