5 resultados para Trials (Treason)--Ontario--Ancaster.
em Université de Lausanne, Switzerland
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The WOSI (Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index) is a self-administered quality of life questionnaire designed to be used as a primary outcome measure in clinical trials on shoulder instability, as well as to measure the effect of an intervention on any particular patient. It is validated and is reliable and sensitive. As it is designed to measure subjective outcome, it is important that translation should be methodologically rigorous, as it is subject to both linguistic and cultural interpretation. OBJECTIVE: To produce a French language version of the WOSI that is culturally adapted to both European and North American French-speaking populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A validated protocol was used to create a French language WOSI questionnaire (WOSI-Fr) that would be culturally acceptable for both European and North American French-speaking populations. Reliability and responsiveness analyses were carried out, and the WOSI-Fr was compared to the F-QuickDASH-D/S (Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand-French translation), and Walch-Duplay scores. RESULTS: A French language version of the WOSI (WOSI-Fr) was accepted by a multinational committee. The WOSI-Fr was then validated using a total of 144 native French-speaking subjects from Canada and Switzerland. Comparison of results on two WOSI-Fr questionnaires completed at a mean interval of 16 days showed that the WOSI-Fr had strong reliability, with a Pearson and interclass correlation of r=0.85 (P=0.01) and ICC=0.84 [95% CI=0.78-0.88]. Responsiveness, at a mean 378.9 days after surgical intervention, showed strong correlation with that of the F-QuickDASH-D/S, with r=0.67 (P<0.01). Moreover, a standardized response means analysis to calculate effect size for both the WOSI-Fr and the F-QuickDASH-D/S showed that the WOSI-Fr had a significantly greater ability to detect change (SRM 1.55 versus 0.87 for the WOSI-Fr and F-QuickDASH-D/S respectively, P<0.01). The WOSI-Fr showed fair correlation with the Walch-Duplay. DISCUSSION: A French-language translation of the WOSI questionnaire was created and validated for use in both Canadian and Swiss French-speaking populations. This questionnaire will facilitate outcome assessment in French-speaking settings, collaboration in multinational studies and comparison between studies performed in different countries. TYPE OF STUDY: Multicenter cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: Several studies observed a female advantage in the prognosis of cutaneous melanoma, for which behavioral factors or an underlying biologic mechanism might be responsible. Using complete and reliable follow-up data from four phase III trials of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Melanoma Group, we explored the female advantage across multiple end points and in relation to other important prognostic indicators. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with localized melanoma were included in EORTC adjuvant treatment trials 18832, 18871, 18952, and 18961 and randomly assigned during the period of 1984 to 2005. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for women compared with men, adjusted for age, Breslow thickness, body site, ulceration, performed lymph node dissection, and treatment. RESULTS: A total of 2,672 patients with stage I/II melanoma were included. Women had a highly consistent and independent advantage in overall survival (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.83), disease-specific survival (adjusted HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.88), time to lymph node metastasis (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.96), and time to distant metastasis (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.81). Subgroup analysis showed that the female advantage was consistent across all prognostic subgroups (with the possible exception of head and neck melanomas) and in pre- and postmenopausal age groups. CONCLUSION: Women have a consistent and independent relative advantage in all aspects of the progression of localized melanoma of approximately 30%, most likely caused by an underlying biologic sex difference.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the planning of subgroup analyses in protocols of randomised controlled trials and the agreement with corresponding full journal publications. DESIGN: Cohort of protocols of randomised controlled trial and subsequent full journal publications. SETTING: Six research ethics committees in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada. DATA SOURCES: 894 protocols of randomised controlled trial involving patients approved by participating research ethics committees between 2000 and 2003 and 515 subsequent full journal publications. RESULTS: Of 894 protocols of randomised controlled trials, 252 (28.2%) included one or more planned subgroup analyses. Of those, 17 (6.7%) provided a clear hypothesis for at least one subgroup analysis, 10 (4.0%) anticipated the direction of a subgroup effect, and 87 (34.5%) planned a statistical test for interaction. Industry sponsored trials more often planned subgroup analyses compared with investigator sponsored trials (195/551 (35.4%) v 57/343 (16.6%), P<0.001). Of 515 identified journal publications, 246 (47.8%) reported at least one subgroup analysis. In 81 (32.9%) of the 246 publications reporting subgroup analyses, authors stated that subgroup analyses were prespecified, but this was not supported by 28 (34.6%) corresponding protocols. In 86 publications, authors claimed a subgroup effect, but only 36 (41.9%) corresponding protocols reported a planned subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Subgroup analyses are insufficiently described in the protocols of randomised controlled trials submitted to research ethics committees, and investigators rarely specify the anticipated direction of subgroup effects. More than one third of statements in publications of randomised controlled trials about subgroup prespecification had no documentation in the corresponding protocols. Definitive judgments regarding credibility of claimed subgroup effects are not possible without access to protocols and analysis plans of randomised controlled trials.
Resumo:
Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) have become major causes of morbidity and mortality among highly immunocompromised patients. Authoritative consensus criteria to diagnose IFD have been useful in establishing eligibility criteria for antifungal trials. There is an important need for generation of consensus definitions of outcomes of IFD that will form a standard for evaluating treatment success and failure in clinical trials. Therefore, an expert international panel consisting of the Mycoses Study Group and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer was convened to propose guidelines for assessing treatment responses in clinical trials of IFDs and for defining study outcomes. Major fungal diseases that are discussed include invasive disease due to Candida species, Aspergillus species and other molds, Cryptococcus neoformans, Histoplasma capsulatum, and Coccidioides immitis. We also discuss potential pitfalls in assessing outcome, such as conflicting clinical, radiological, and/or mycological data and gaps in knowledge.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency of interim analyses, stopping rules, and data safety and monitoring boards (DSMBs) in protocols of randomized controlled trials (RCTs); to examine these features across different reasons for trial discontinuation; and to identify discrepancies in reporting between protocols and publications. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We used data from a cohort of RCT protocols approved between 2000 and 2003 by six research ethics committees in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada. RESULTS: Of 894 RCT protocols, 289 prespecified interim analyses (32.3%), 153 stopping rules (17.1%), and 257 DSMBs (28.7%). Overall, 249 of 894 RCTs (27.9%) were prematurely discontinued; mostly due to reasons such as poor recruitment, administrative reasons, or unexpected harm. Forty-six of 249 RCTs (18.4%) were discontinued due to early benefit or futility; of those, 37 (80.4%) were stopped outside a formal interim analysis or stopping rule. Of 515 published RCTs, there were discrepancies between protocols and publications for interim analyses (21.1%), stopping rules (14.4%), and DSMBs (19.6%). CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of RCT protocols did not consider interim analyses, stopping rules, or DSMBs. Most RCTs discontinued for early benefit or futility were stopped without a prespecified mechanism. When assessing trial manuscripts, journals should require access to the protocol.