Trials - Most viewed articles

Informed consent for clinical trials in acute coronary syndromes and stroke following the European Clinical Trials Directive: investigators' experiences and attitudes

2008-07-21

Background: During clinical trials in emergency medicine, providing appropriate oral and written information to a patient is usually a challenge. There is little published information regarding patients' opinions and competence to provide informed consent, nor on physicians' attitudes towards the process. We have investigated the problem of obtaining consent from patients in emergency-setting clinical trials (such as acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and stroke) from a physicians' perspective. Methods: A standardised anonymous 14-item questionnaire was distributed to Polish cardiac and stroke centres. Results: Two hundred and fourteen informative investigator responses were received. Of these investigators, 73.8% had experience with ACS and 25.2% had experience with acute stroke trials (and 1% with both fields). The complete model of informed consent (embracing all aspects required by Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and law) was used in 53.3% of cases in emergency settings, whereas the legal option of proxy consent was not used at all. While less than 15% of respondents considered written information to have been fully read by patients, 80.4% thought that the amount of information being given to emergency patients is too lengthy. Although there is no legal obligation, more than half of the investigators sought parallel consent (assent) from patients' relatives. Most investigators confirmed that they would adopt the model proposed by the GCP guidelines: abbreviated verbal and written consent in emergency conditions with obligatory "all-embracing" deferred consent to continue the trial once the patient is able to provide it. However, this model would not follow current Polish and European legislation. Conclusion: An update of national and European regulations is required to enable implementation of the emergency trial consent model referred to in GCP guidelines.

Meta-analysis of trials comparing anastrozole and tamoxifen for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer

Adnan Aydiner and Faruk Tas — 2008-07-29

ObjectiveIt was aimed to review the literature and make a meta-analysis of the trials on both upfront, switching, and sequencing anastrozole in the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. Methods: The PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane databases were systematically reviewed for randomized-controlled trials comparing anastrozole with tamoxifen in the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. Results: The combined hazard rate of 4 trials for event-free survival (EFS) was 0.77 (95%CI: 0.70–0.85) (P < 0.0001) for patients treated with anastrozole compared with tamoxifen. In the second analysis in which only ITA, ABCSG 8, and ARNO 95 trials were included and ATAC (upfront trial) was excluded, combined hazard rate for EFS was 0.64 (95%CI: 0.52–0.79) (P < 0.0001). In the third analysis including hazard rate for recurrence-free survival (excluding non-disease related deaths) of estrogen receptor-positive patients for ATAC trial and hazard rate for EFS of all patients for the rest of the trials, combined hazard rate was 0.73 (95%CI: 0.65–0.81) (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: Anastrozole appears to have superior efficacy than tamoxifen in the adjuvant hormonal treatment of early breast cancer. Until further clinical evidence comes up, aromatase inhibitors should be the initial hormonal therapy in postmenopausal early breast cancer patients and switching should only be considered for patients who are currently receiving tamoxifen.

A review of RCTs in four medical journals to assess the use of imputation to overcome missing data in quality of life outcomes

Shona Fielding, Graeme Maclennan, Jonathan A Cook and Craig R Ramsay — 2008-08-11

Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are perceived as the gold-standard method for evaluating healthcare interventions, and increasingly include quality of life (QoL) measures. The observed results are susceptible to bias if a substantial proportion of outcome data are missing. The review aimed to determine whether imputation was used to deal with missing QoL outcomes. Methods: A random selection of 285 RCTs published during 2005/6 in the British Medical Journal, Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of American Medical Association were identified. Results: QoL outcomes were reported in 61 (21%) trials. Six (10%) reported having no missing data, 20 (33%) reported [less than or equal to]10% missing, eleven (18%) 11%-20% missing, and eleven (18%) reported >20% missing. Missingness was unclear in 13 (21%). Missing data were imputed in 19 (31%) of the 61 trials. Imputation was part of the primary analysis in 13 trials, but a sensitivity analysis in six. Last value carried forward was used in 12 trials and multiple imputation in two. Following imputation, the most common analysis method was analysis of covariance (10 trials). Conclusion: The majority of studies did not impute missing data and carried out a complete-case analysis. For those studies that did impute missing data, researchers tended to prefer simpler methods of imputation, despite more sophisticated methods being available.

Bright light in elderly subjects with nonseasonal major depression: a double blind, randomised clinical trial using early morning bright blue light comparing dim red light treatment

2008-07-31

Background: Depression frequently occurs in the elderly. Its cause is largely unknown, but several studies point to disturbances of biological rhythmicity. In both normal aging, and depression, the functioning of the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) is impaired, as evidenced by an increased prevalence of day-night rhythm perturbations, such as sleeping disorders. Moreover, the inhibitory SCN neurons on the hypothalamus-pituitary adrenocortical axis (HPA-axis) have decreased activity and HPA-activity is enhanced, when compared to non-depressed elderly. Using bright light therapy (BLT) the SCN can be stimulated. In addition, the beneficial effects of BLT on seasonal depression are well accepted. BLT is a potentially safe, nonexpensive and well accepted treatment option. But the current literature on BLT for depression is inconclusive. Methods: This study aims to show whether BLT can reduce non-seasonal major depression in elderly patients. Randomized double blind placebo controlled trial in 126 subjects of 60 years and older with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD, DSM-IV/SCID-I). Subjects are recruited through referrals of psychiatric outpatient clinics and from case finding from databases of general practitioners and old-people homes in the Amsterdam region. After inclusion subjects are randomly allocated to the active (bright blue light) vs. placebo (dim red light) condition using two Philips Bright Light Energy boxes type HF 3304 per subject, from which the light bulbs have been covered with bright blue- or dim red light- permitting filters. Patients will be stratified by use of antidepressants. Prior to treatment a one-week period without light treatment will be used. At three time points several endocrinological, psychophysiological, psychometrically, neuropsychological measures are performed: just before the start of light therapy, after completion of three weeks therapy period, and three weeks thereafter.DiscussionIf BLT reduces nonseasonal depression in elderly patients, then additional lightning may easily be implemented in the homes of patients to serve as add-on treatment to antidepressants or as a stand-alone treatment in elderly depressed patients. In addition, if our data support the role of a dysfunctional biological clock in depressed elderly subjects, such a finding may guide further development of novel chronobiological oriented treatment strategies. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00332670

Approaches to interim analysis of cancer randomised clinical trials with time to event endpoints: a survey from the Italian National Monitoring Centre for Clinical Trials.

2008-07-25

Background: Although interim analysis approaches in clinical trials are widely known, information on current practice of planned monitoring is still scarce. Reports of studies rarely include details on the strategies for both data monitoring and interim analysis. The aim of this project is to investigate the forms of monitoring used in cancer clinical trials and in particular to gather information on the role of interim analyses in the data monitoring process of a clinical trial. This study focused on the prevalence of different types of interim analyses and data monitoring in cancer clinical trials. Methods: Source of investigation were the protocols of cancer clinical trials included in the Italian registry of clinical trials from 2000 to 2005. Evaluation was restricted to protocols of randomised studies with a time to event endpoint, such as overall survival (OS) or progression free survival (PFS). A template data extraction form was developed and tested in a pilot phase. Selection of relevant protocols and data extraction were performed independently by two evaluators, with differences in the data assessment resolved by consensus with a third reviewer, referring back to the original protocol. Information was obtained on a) general characteristics of the protocol b) disease localization and patient setting; c) study design d) interim analyses; e) DSMC Results: The analysis of the collected protocols reveals that 70.7% of the protocols incorporate statistical interim analysis plans, but only 56% have also a DSMC and be considered adequately planned. The most concerning cases are related to lack of any form of monitoring (20.0% of the protocols), and the planning of interim analysis, without DSMC (14.7%) Conclusions: The results indicate that there is still insufficient attention paid to the implementation of interim analysis.

Non-invasive cardiac assessment in high risk patients (the ground study): Rationale, objectives and design of a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial

2008-08-01

Background: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a common disease associated with a considerably increased risk of future cardiovascular events and most of these patients will die from coronary artery disease (CAD). Screening for silent CAD has become an option with recent non-invasive developments in CT (computed tomography)-angiography and MR (magnetic resonance) stress testing. Screening in combination with more aggressive treatment may improve prognosis. Therefore we propose to study whether a cardiac imaging algorithm, using non-invasive imaging techniques followed by treatment will reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in PAD patients free from cardiac symptoms.DesignThe GROUND study is designed as a prospective, multi-center, randomized clinical trial. Patients with peripheral arterial disease, but without symptomatic cardiac disease will be asked to participate. All patients receive a proper risk factor management before randomization. Half of the recruited patients will enter the acontrol groupa and only undergo CT calcium scoring. The other half of the recruited patients (index group) will undergo the non invasive cardiac imaging algorithm followed by evidence-based treatment. First, patients are submitted to CT calcium scoring and CT angiography. Patients with a left main (or equivalent) coronary artery stenosis of > 50% on CT will be referred to a cardiologist without further imaging. All other patients in this group will undergo dobutamine stress magnetic resonance (DSMR) testing. Patients with a DSMR positive for ischemia will also be referred to a cardiologist. These patients are candidates for conventional coronary angiography and cardiac interventions (coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous cardiac interventions (PCI)), if indicated. All participants of the trial will enter a 5 year follow up period for the occurrence of cardiovascular events. Sequential interim analysis will take place. Based on sample size calculations about 1200 patients are needed to detect a 24% reduction in primary outcome.ImplicationsThe GROUND study will provide insight into the question whether non-invasive cardiac imaging reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with peripheral arterial disease, but without symptoms of coronary artery disease. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00189111

A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the safety, clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and satisfaction with point of care testing in a general practice setting - rationale, design and baseline characteristics

2008-08-06

Background: Point of care testing (PoCT) may be a useful adjunct in the management of chronic conditions in general practice (GP). The provision of pathology test results at the time of the consultation could lead to enhanced clinical management, better health outcomes, greater convenience and satisfaction for patients and general practitioners (GPs), and savings in costs and time. It could also result in inappropriate testing, increased consultations and poor health outcomes resulting from inaccurate results. Currently there are very few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in GP that have investigated these aspects of PoCT. Design/Methods The Point of Care Testing in General Practice Trial (PoCT Trial) was an Australian Government funded multi-centre, cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the safety, clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and satisfaction of PoCT in a GP setting. The PoCT Trial covered an 18 month period with the intervention consisting of the use of PoCT for seven tests used in the management of patients with diabetes, hyperlipidaemia and patients on anticoagulant therapy. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients within target range, a measure of therapeutic control. In addition, the PoCT Trial investigated the safety of PoCT, impact of PoCT on patient compliance to medication, stakeholder satisfaction, cost effectiveness of PoCT versus laboratory testing, and influence of geographic location.DiscussionThe paper provides an overview of the Trial Design, the rationale for the research methodology chosen and how the Trial was implemented in a GP environment. The evaluation protocol and data collection processes took into account the large number of patients, the broad range of practice types distributed over a large geographic area, and the inclusion of pathology test results from multiple pathology laboratories. The evaluation protocol developed reflects the complexity of the Trial setting, the Trial Design and the approach taken within the funding provided. The PoCT Trial is regarded as a pragmatic RCT, evaluating the effectiveness of implementing PoCT in GP and every effort was made to ensure that, in these circumstances, internal and external validity was maintained. Trial Registration: 12612605000272695

Do we want more cancer patients on clinical trials If so, what are the barriers to greater accrual

Andrew J Vickers — 2008-06-03

It is often stated that only a small proportion of adult cancer patients participate in clinical trials. This is said to be a bad thing, with calls for more trials to include more patients. Here I argue that whether or not greater accrual to clinical trials would be a good thing depends on the trials we conduct. The vast majority of clinical trials in cancer are currently early phase trials, and most do not lead to further studies even if they have encouraging results. The key metric is thus not the number of patients on clinical trials, but the number on the sort of large, randomized, Phase III trials that can be used as a basis for clinical decisions. I also address two important barriers to greater clinical trial participation. The first barrier is financial: clinical research has long been the poor cousin of basic research, with perhaps no more than a nickel in the cancer research dollar going to clinical research. The second barrier is regulatory: clinical research has become so overburdened by regulation that it takes years to initiate a trial, and dedicated staff just to deal with the paperwork once the trial starts. This not only adds significantly to the costs of clinical research, but scares many young investigators away. It has been estimated that nearly half of all US-sponsored trials are being conducted abroad, and it is plausible that excessive regulation is at least partly responsible. That statistic should serve as a wake-up call to the US clinical research community to implement the recommendations of the now decade-old report of National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials Program Review Group, which largely center around simplifying trials and streamlining trial procedures.

Rationale, design and methodology for a Prospective Randomized Study of graft patency in Off-pump and On-pump MultI-Vessel coronary artery bypasS Surgery (PROMISS) using multidetector computed tomography

Miguel Sousa Uva, Fernando Matias, Sara Cavaco and Manuel Pedro Magalhães — 2008-07-17

Background: Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting has been accused of possibly compromising graft patency. Sixteen slice computed tomography has shown good diagnostic accuracy in the assessment of coronary bypass graft patency when compared with conventional coronary artery angiography and is less invasive. The study hypothesis is that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) performed without cardiopulmonary bypass (Off-Pump) has equivalent early graft patency as if performed with cardiopulmonary bypass (On-Pump) and may have reduced complication rate.Methods/DesignThe Prospective Randomized Comparison of Off-Pump and On-Pump MultI-vessel Coronary Artery BypasS Surgery (PROMISS) is a controlled, single blinded, single centre clinical trial, comparing early graft patency using 16-slice computed tomography in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease operated either without or with extracorporeal circulation. Inclusion criteria are multivessel disease with an indication for first time, isolated, non emergent coronary artery bypass grafting with a minimum of three distal anastomoses. Secondary end points are peri-operative mortality, combined morbidity, length of stay, neuro-cognitive testing at 6 weeks and adverse events, stress test and quality of life at 6 months and one year. The sample size of one hundred and fifty patients was calculated in order to enable the detection of a 5% difference in graft patency, with 80% power, considering a minimum of 3 distal anastomoses per patient. Enrolment started in April 2005 and ended July 2007 with study closure in July 2008. Conclusion: The PROMISS trial aims to shed new light on the effect of Off-Pump as compared to On-Pump coronary artery bypass surgery on graft patency, assessed by multidetector computed tomography, in unselected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.Trial RegistrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN58800729

The third international stroke trial (IST-3) of thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke

2008-06-17

Background: Intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) is approved for use in selected patients with ischaemic stroke within 3 hours of symptom onset. IST-3 seeks to determine whether a wider range of patients may benefit.DesignInternational, multi-centre, prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial of intravenous rt-PA in acute ischaemic stroke. Suitable patients must be assessed and able to start treatment within 6 hours of developing symptoms, and brain imaging must have excluded intracerebral haemorrhage. With 1000 patients, the trial can detect a 7% absolute difference in the primary outcome. With3500 patients, it can detect a 4.0% absolute benefit & with 6000, (mostly treated between 3 & 6 hours), it can detect a 3% benefit.Trial proceduresPatients are entered into the trial by telephoning a fast, secure computerised central randomisation system or via a secure web interface. Repeat brain imaging must be performed at 24–48 hours. The scans are reviewed 'blind' by expert readers. The primary measure of outcome is the proportion of patients alive and independent (Modified Rankin 0–2) at six months (assessed via a postal questionnaire mailed directly to the patient). Secondary outcomes include: events within 7 days (death, recurrent stroke, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage), outcome at six months (death, functional status, EuroQol).Trial registrationISRCTN25765518