Sharma Tarang, Guski Louise Schow, Freund Nanna, Meng Dina Muscat, Gøtzsche Peter C
Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Institute for Scientific Freedom, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Int J Risk Saf Med. 2019;30(4):217-232. doi: 10.3233/JRS-195041.
To study the drop-out rates in trials of selective serotonin and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs and SNRIs).
This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials. The main outcome measure: Overall drop-out rate. Secondary outcomes were drop-outs due to adverse events and lack of effect. We obtained clinical study reports (CSRs) of five antidepressant drugs from the European Medicines Agency and the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies: double-blind randomised, placebo-controlled trials for any indication.
The primary outcome was extracted by two researchers independently and meta-analysed using the Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed effect model). The secondary outcomes were extracted by one researcher and checked by another. Sensitivity analyses were performed using Peto's odds ratio and beta binomial methods, due to presence of null events, and by excluding unreliable trials.
We included 71 CSRs (67,319 pages) with information on 73 trials (11,057 patients on SSRI or SNRI drugs, and 7,369 on placebo). There were minor discrepancies within the CSRs when a modified intention to treat principle was used and patients lost to follow up early in the trial were not accounted for. Significantly more patients dropped out on active drug than on placebo, risk ratio 1.08 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.13), with no difference between adults and children/ adolescents, RR = 1.08 (1.03 to 1.13) and 1.07 (0.95 to 1.21), respectively. When three trials with a prior single-blind phase on active drug were removed, the difference was a risk ratio of 1.12 (1.07 to 1.18), whereas the result was the same after removal of three trials with fraudulent data or other issues with data validity, risk ratio 1.08 (1.03 to 1.13). There were more drop-outs due to adverse events on active drug than on placebo, risk ratio 2.63 (2.33 to 2.96). There were fewer drop-outs due to lack of effect, risk ratio 0.47 (0.43 to 0.53). However, this result is biased; when more people drop out due to adverse effects, fewer can drop out because of lack of effect.
By using CSRs, we were able to demonstrate for the first time that more patients dropped out on active drug than on placebo. As it can be argued that the drop-out rate reflects the patients' overall assessment of the balance between benefits and harms, our review adds to the growing concern that SSRIs and SNRIs might not have the desired effect. Our review also highlights the importance of using CSRs for undertaking reviews of drugs.
研究选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂和5-羟色胺-去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂(SSRI和SNRI)试验中的脱落率。
本研究是对试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。主要结局指标:总体脱落率。次要结局是因不良事件和无效而导致的脱落。我们从欧洲药品管理局和英国药品及保健品监管局获得了五种抗抑郁药物的临床研究报告(CSR)。选择研究的纳入标准:针对任何适应症的双盲随机、安慰剂对照试验。
主要结局由两名研究人员独立提取,并使用Mantel-Haenszel方法(固定效应模型)进行荟萃分析。次要结局由一名研究人员提取并由另一名研究人员检查。由于存在零事件,使用Peto比值比和贝塔二项式方法进行敏感性分析,并排除不可靠的试验。
我们纳入了71份CSR(67319页),其中包含73项试验的信息(11057例服用SSRI或SNRI药物的患者,7369例服用安慰剂的患者)。当采用改良意向性治疗原则且未计入试验早期失访的患者时,CSR内部存在微小差异。服用活性药物的患者脱落显著多于服用安慰剂的患者,风险比为1.08(95%CI 1.03至1.13),成人与儿童/青少年之间无差异,RR分别为1.08(1.03至1.13)和1.07(0.95至1.21)。当去除三项在活性药物上有前期单盲阶段的试验时,差异为风险比1.12(1.07至1.18),而在去除三项存在欺诈数据或其他数据有效性问题的试验后结果相同,风险比为1.08(1.03至1.13)。因不良事件在活性药物上导致的脱落多于安慰剂,风险比为2.63(2.33至2.96)。因无效导致的脱落较少,风险比为0.47(0.43至0.53)。然而,这一结果存在偏差;当因不良反应导致更多人脱落时,因无效而脱落的人就会减少。
通过使用CSR,我们首次证明服用活性药物的患者脱落多于服用安慰剂的患者。由于可以认为脱落率反映了患者对利弊平衡的总体评估,我们的综述增加了人们对SSRI和SNRI可能没有预期效果的日益担忧。我们的综述还强调了使用CSR进行药物综述的重要性。