Performing meta-analysis with incomplete statistical information in clinical trials

Background: Results from clinical trials are usually summarized in the form of sampling distributions. When full information (mean, SEM) about these distributions is given, performing meta-analysis is straightforward. However, when some of the sampling distributions only have mean values, a challenging issue is to decide how to use such distributions in meta-analysis. Currently, the most common approaches are either ignoring such trials or for each trial with a missing SEM, finding a similar trial and taking its SEM value as the missing SEM. Both approaches have drawbacks. As an alternative, this paper develops and tests two new methods, the first being the prognostic method and the second being the interval method, to estimate any missing SEMs from a set of sampling distributions with full information. A merging method is also proposed to handle clinical trials with partial information to simulate meta-analysis.

Healthcare professional experiences and attitudes on unlicensed/off-label paediatric prescribing and paediatric clinical trials.

Objectives: To investigate the knowledge and views of a range of healthcare professionals (consultant paediatricians, general practitioners (GPs), community pharmacists and paediatric nurses) regarding the use of unlicensed/off-label medicines in children and the participation of children in clinical trials.

Methods: A regional study in which a survey instrument with 39 items was issued to 500 randomly selected GPs, all community pharmacists (n?=?512), 50 hospital consultants and 150 paediatric nurses in Northern Ireland.

Results: Approximately half (46.5%) of the 1,212 healthcare professionals approached responded to the questionnaire. The majority of respondents indicated their familiarity with the term unlicensed (82.9%) or off-label (58.6%) prescribing with the most frequently quoted reason for such prescribing being younger age (33.6%). Apart from community pharmacists, most respondents reported having gained their knowledge through personal experience. Even though a large percentage of respondents expressed concerns about the safety (77.8%) or efficacy (87.9%) of unlicensed/off-label prescribing in children, only 30.7% reported informing parents/guardians of these concerns on the use of such medicines in children. In addition, only 56% of respondents believed that unlicensed/off-label medicines should undergo clinical trials in children. Overall, 28.4% of respondents (20.1% of GPs, 41.4% of community pharmacists, 27.7% of paediatric nurses and 94% of consultant paediatricians) indicated their willingness to be actively involved in, and recruit their patients for paediatric clinical research.

Conclusion: The use of unlicensed and off-label medicines remains a major issue in paediatric medicine. Until such times as more licensed medicines are available for children, clear guidance should be developed to allow consistency in practice across the spectrum of healthcare professionals who are involved with such medicines in their routine practice.

Children’s views on unlicensed/off-label paediatric prescribing and paediatric clinical trials.

Objectives: To explore the views and perspectives of children on the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children and on the participation of children in clinical trials. Methods: Focus-group discussions, involving school children, were carried out in a range of primary and secondary schools in Northern Ireland. A purposeful sample was chosen to facilitate representation of various socioeconomic groupings. Results: A total of 123 pupils, aged from 10 to 16 years, from six schools, participated in 16 focus groups. In general, pupils viewed the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children as unsafe and unethical and felt it is necessary to test medicines in children to improve the availability of licensed products. The majority felt that older children should be told, and that parents should be told, about the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children, yet they recognised some implications of this, such as potential medication non-adherence. Conclusions: This is the first study to explore the views of healthy children on unlicensed medicine use in children. Children were able to recognise potential risks associated with the unlicensed use of medicines and felt it is necessary to test and license more medicines in children. Practice implications Health care professionals should consider the views of children in decisions that affect their health.

Cognitive, global, and functional benefits of donepezil in Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia:results from large-scale clinical trials

Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD) are both associated with deficits in cholinergic neurotransmission that are amenable to therapeutic intervention. The cholinesterase inhibitor, donepezil, is clinically effective in both AD and VaD. Results from a 10-study metaanalysis of donepezil (5 or 10 mg/day) in AD and a two-study combined analysis of donepezil (5 or 10 mg/day) in VaD are presented to compare patient characteristics and donepezil treatment outcomes. The analyzed studies were randomized, placebo-controlled, and of up to 24 weeks duration. In both AD and VaD, donepezil provided significant benefits compared with placebo on measures of cognition and global function. Placebo-treated AD patients showed a decline in cognition and global function, whereas placebo-treated VaD patients remained stable, suggesting treatment effects of donepezil in VaD were driven by improvement rather than stabilization or reduced decline. More VaD patients than AD patients received concomitant medications. Cardiovascular adverse events were more common in VaD than AD patients but were not increased by donepezil. In conclusion, although there are differences between AD and VaD patients in comorbid conditions and concomitant medications, donepezil is effective and well tolerated in both types of dementia.

The geriatric minimum data set for clinical trials (GMDS)

To overcome the weak evidence base coming from often poor and insufficient clinical research in older people, a minimum data set to achieve harmonisation is highly advisable. This will lead to uniform nomenclature and to the standardisation of the assessment tools. Our primary objective was to develop a Geriatric Minimum Data Set (GMDS) for clinical research.