The Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Northern Ireland Clinical Trials Unit, Belfast, UK.
Clin Trials. 2023 Jun;20(3):307-318. doi: 10.1177/17407745231151842. Epub 2023 Mar 22.
The choice of outcome measure is a critical decision in the design of any clinical trial, but many Phase III clinical trials in critical care fail to detect a difference between the interventions being compared. This may be because the surrogate outcomes used to show beneficial effects in early phase trials (which informed the design of the subsequent Phase III trials) are not valid guides to the differences between the interventions for the main outcomes of the Phase III trials. We undertook a systematic review (1) to generate a list of outcome measures used in critical care trials, (2) to determine the variability in the outcome reporting in the respiratory subgroup and (3) to create a smaller list of potential early phase endpoints in the respiratory subgroup.
Data related to outcomes were extracted from studies published in the six top-ranked critical care journals between 2010 and 2020. Outcomes were classified into subcategories and categories. A subset of early phase endpoints relevant to the respiratory subgroup was selected for further investigation. The variability of the outcomes and the variability in reporting was investigated.
A total of 6905 references were retrieved and a total of 294 separate outcomes were identified from 58 studies. The outcomes were then classified into 11 categories and 66 subcategories. A subset of 22 outcomes relevant for the respiratory group were identified as potential early phase outcomes. The summary statistics, time points and definitions show the outcomes are analysed and reported in different ways.
The outcome measures were defined, analysed and reported in a variety of ways. This creates difficulties for synthesising data in systematic reviews and planning definitive trials. This review once again highlights an urgent need for standardisation and validation of surrogate outcomes reported in critical care trials. Future work should aim to validate and develop a core outcome set for surrogate outcomes in critical care trials.
在任何临床试验的设计中,选择结局测量都是一个关键决策,但许多重症监护的 III 期临床试验未能检测到比较干预措施之间的差异。这可能是因为在早期试验中用于显示有益效果的替代结局(为随后的 III 期试验设计提供信息)并不能有效指导 III 期试验主要结局的干预措施之间的差异。我们进行了一项系统评价(1)生成一份重症监护试验中使用的结局测量清单,(2)确定呼吸亚组中结局报告的变异性,(3)创建呼吸亚组中潜在早期阶段终点的较小清单。
从 2010 年至 2020 年在六本顶级重症监护期刊上发表的研究中提取与结局相关的数据。结局被分为亚类和类别。选择与呼吸亚组相关的早期阶段终点子集进行进一步研究。调查了结局和报告变异性。
共检索到 6905 篇参考文献,从 58 项研究中确定了 294 项不同的结局。这些结局随后被分为 11 个类别和 66 个亚类。确定了 22 个与呼吸组相关的潜在早期阶段结局作为潜在的早期阶段结局。汇总统计数据、时间点和定义表明,以不同的方式分析和报告结局。
结局测量以各种方式定义、分析和报告。这给系统评价中数据综合和确定试验带来了困难。本研究再次强调了急需对重症监护试验中报告的替代结局进行标准化和验证。未来的工作应旨在验证和开发重症监护试验中替代结局的核心结局集。