41 resultados para Randomised Controlled Trial
Resumo:
Textbooks, across all disciplines, are prone to contain errors; grammatical, editorial, factual, or judgemental. The following is an account of one of the possible effects of such errors; how an error becomes entrenched and even exaggerated as later textbooks fail to correct the original error. The example considered here concerns the origins of one of the most basic and important tools of to day's medical research, the randomised controlled trial. It is the result of a systematic study of 26 British, French and German history of medicine textbooks since 1996.
Resumo:
Patients with critical limb ischaemia have a high rate of amputation and mortality. We tested the hypothesis that non-viral 1 fibroblast growth factor (NV1FGF) would improve amputation-free survival.
Resumo:
To compare the effectiveness of two anti-infective protocols for the treatment of peri-implant mucositis.
Resumo:
To evaluate the effectiveness of register based, yearly chlamydia screening.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of 200 mg of daily vaginal natural progesterone to prevent preterm birth in women with preterm labour. DESIGN Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING Twenty-nine centres in Switzerland and Argentina. POPULATION A total of 385 women with preterm labour (24(0/7) to 33(6/7) weeks of gestation) treated with acute tocolysis. METHODS Participants were randomly allocated to either 200 mg daily of self-administered vaginal progesterone or placebo within 48 hours of starting acute tocolysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcome was delivery before 37 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes were delivery before 32 and 34 weeks, adverse effects, duration of tocolysis, re-admissions for preterm labour, length of hospital stay, and neonatal morbidity and mortality. The study was ended prematurely based on results of the intermediate analysis. RESULTS Preterm birth occurred in 42.5% of women in the progesterone group versus 35.5% in the placebo group (relative risk [RR] 1.2; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.93-1.5). Delivery at <32 and <34 weeks did not differ between the two groups (12.9 versus 9.7%; [RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.7-2.5] and 19.7 versus 12.9% [RR 1.5; 95% CI 0.9-2.4], respectively). The duration of tocolysis, hospitalisation, and recurrence of preterm labour were comparable between groups. Neonatal morbidity occurred in 44 (22.8%) cases on progesterone versus 35 (18.8%) cases on placebo (RR: 1.2; 95% CI 0.82-1.8), whereas there were 4 (2%) neonatal deaths in each study group. CONCLUSION There is no evidence that the daily administration of 200 mg vaginal progesterone decreases preterm birth or improves neonatal outcome in women with preterm labour.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Clinical trials yielded conflicting data about the benefit of adding systemic corticosteroids for treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. We assessed whether short-term corticosteroid treatment reduces time to clinical stability in patients admitted to hospital for community-acquired pneumonia. METHODS In this double-blind, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with community-acquired pneumonia from seven tertiary care hospitals in Switzerland within 24 h of presentation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either prednisone 50 mg daily for 7 days or placebo. The computer-generated randomisation was done with variable block sizes of four to six and stratified by study centre. The primary endpoint was time to clinical stability defined as time (days) until stable vital signs for at least 24 h, and analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00973154. FINDINGS From Dec 1, 2009, to May 21, 2014, of 2911 patients assessed for eligibility, 785 patients were randomly assigned to either the prednisone group (n=392) or the placebo group (n=393). Median time to clinical stability was shorter in the prednisone group (3·0 days, IQR 2·5-3·4) than in the placebo group (4·4 days, 4·0-5·0; hazard ratio [HR] 1·33, 95% CI 1·15-1·50, p<0·0001). Pneumonia-associated complications until day 30 did not differ between groups (11 [3%] in the prednisone group and 22 [6%] in the placebo group; odds ratio [OR] 0·49 [95% CI 0·23-1·02]; p=0·056). The prednisone group had a higher incidence of in-hospital hyperglycaemia needing insulin treatment (76 [19%] vs 43 [11%]; OR 1·96, 95% CI 1·31-2·93, p=0·0010). Other adverse events compatible with corticosteroid use were rare and similar in both groups. INTERPRETATION Prednisone treatment for 7 days in patients with community-acquired pneumonia admitted to hospital shortens time to clinical stability without an increase in complications. This finding is relevant from a patient perspective and an important determinant of hospital costs and efficiency. FUNDING Swiss National Science Foundation, Viollier AG, Nora van Meeuwen Haefliger Stiftung, Julia und Gottfried Bangerter-Rhyner Stiftung.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Giant cell arteritis is an immune-mediated disease of medium and large-sized arteries that affects mostly people older than 50 years of age. Treatment with glucocorticoids is the gold-standard and prevents severe vascular complications but is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Tocilizumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor, has been associated with rapid induction and maintenance of remission in patients with giant cell arteritis. We therefore aimed to study the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in the first randomised clinical trial in patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent giant cell arteritis. METHODS In this single centre, phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited patients aged 50 years and older from University Hospital Bern, Switzerland, who met the 1990 American College of Rheumatology criteria for giant cell arteritis. Patients with new-onset or relapsing disease were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either tocilizumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo intravenously. 13 infusions were given in 4 week intervals until week 52. Both groups received oral prednisolone, starting at 1 mg/kg per day and tapered down to 0 mg according to a standard reduction scheme defined in the study protocol. Allocation to treatment groups was done using a central computerised randomisation procedure with a permuted block design and a block size of three, and concealed using central randomisation generated by the clinical trials unit. Patients, investigators, and study personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved complete remission of disease at a prednisolone dose of 0·1 mg/kg per day at week 12. All analyses were intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01450137. RESULTS Between March 3, 2012, and Sept 9, 2014, 20 patients were randomly assigned to receive tocilizumab and prednisolone, and ten patients to receive placebo and glucocorticoid; 16 (80%) and seven (70%) patients, respectively, had new-onset giant cell arteritis. 17 (85%) of 20 patients given tocilizumab and four (40%) of ten patients given placebo reached complete remission by week 12 (risk difference 45%, 95% CI 11-79; p=0·0301). Relapse-free survival was achieved in 17 (85%) patients in the tocilizumab group and two (20%) in the placebo group by week 52 (risk difference 65%, 95% CI 36-94; p=0·0010). The mean survival-time difference to stop glucocorticoids was 12 weeks in favour of tocilizumab (95% CI 7-17; p<0·0001), leading to a cumulative prednisolone dose of 43 mg/kg in the tocilizumab group versus 110 mg/kg in the placebo group (p=0·0005) after 52 weeks. Seven (35%) patients in the tocilizumab group and five (50%) in the placebo group had serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION Our findings show, for the first time in a trial setting, the efficacy of tocilizumab in the induction and maintenance of remission in patients with giant cell arteritis. FUNDING Roche and the University of Bern.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION Optic neuritis leads to degeneration of retinal ganglion cells whose axons form the optic nerve. The standard treatment is a methylprednisolone pulse therapy. This treatment slightly shortens the time of recovery but does not prevent neurodegeneration and persistent visual impairment. In a phase II trial performed in preparation of this study, we have shown that erythropoietin protects global retinal nerve fibre layer thickness (RNFLT-G) in acute optic neuritis; however, the preparatory trial was not powered to show effects on visual function. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Treatment of Optic Neuritis with Erythropoietin (TONE) is a national, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial with two parallel arms. The primary objective is to determine the efficacy of erythropoietin compared to placebo given add-on to methylprednisolone as assessed by measurements of RNFLT-G and low-contrast visual acuity in the affected eye 6 months after randomisation. Inclusion criteria are a first episode of optic neuritis with decreased visual acuity to ≤0.5 (decimal system) and an onset of symptoms within 10 days prior to inclusion. The most important exclusion criteria are history of optic neuritis or multiple sclerosis or any ocular disease (affected or non-affected eye), significant hyperopia, myopia or astigmatism, elevated blood pressure, thrombotic events or malignancy. After randomisation, patients either receive 33 000 international units human recombinant erythropoietin intravenously for 3 consecutive days or placebo (0.9% saline) administered intravenously. With an estimated power of 80%, the calculated sample size is 100 patients. The trial started in September 2014 with a planned recruitment period of 30 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION TONE has been approved by the Central Ethics Commission in Freiburg (194/14) and the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (61-3910-4039831). It complies with the Declaration of Helsinki, local laws and ICH-GCP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01962571.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether excluding patients from the analysis of randomised trials are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects and higher heterogeneity between trials. DESIGN: Meta-epidemiological study based on a collection of meta-analyses of randomised trials. DATA SOURCES: 14 meta-analyses including 167 trials that compared therapeutic interventions with placebo or non-intervention control in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee and used patient reported pain as an outcome. METHODS: Effect sizes were calculated from differences in means of pain intensity between groups at the end of follow-up, divided by the pooled standard deviation. Trials were combined by using random effects meta-analysis. Estimates of treatment effects were compared between trials with and trials without exclusions from the analysis, and the impact of restricting meta-analyses to trials without exclusions was assessed. RESULTS: 39 trials (23%) had included all patients in the analysis. In 128 trials (77%) some patients were excluded from the analysis. Effect sizes from trials with exclusions tended to be more beneficial than those from trials without exclusions (difference -0.13, 95% confidence interval -0.29 to 0.04). However, estimates of bias between individual meta-analyses varied considerably (tau(2)=0.07). Tests of interaction between exclusions from the analysis and estimates of treatment effects were positive in five meta-analyses. Stratified analyses indicated that differences in effect sizes between trials with and trials without exclusions were more pronounced in meta-analyses with high between trial heterogeneity, in meta-analyses with large estimated treatment benefits, and in meta-analyses of complementary medicine. Restriction of meta-analyses to trials without exclusions resulted in smaller estimated treatment benefits, larger P values, and considerable decreases in between trial heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Excluding patients from the analysis in randomised trials often results in biased estimates of treatment effects, but the extent and direction of bias is unpredictable. Results from intention to treat analyses should always be described in reports of randomised trials. In systematic reviews, the influence of exclusions from the analysis on estimated treatment effects should routinely be assessed.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND REG1 is a novel anticoagulation system consisting of pegnivacogin, an RNA aptamer inhibitor of coagulation factor IXa, and anivamersen, a complementary sequence reversal oligonucleotide. We tested the hypothesis that near complete inhibition of factor IXa with pegnivacogin during percutaneous coronary intervention, followed by partial reversal with anivamersen, would reduce ischaemic events compared with bivalirudin, without increasing bleeding. METHODS We did a randomised, open-label, active-controlled, multicentre, superiority trial to compare REG1 with bivalirudin at 225 hospitals in North America and Europe. We planned to randomly allocate 13,200 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in a 1:1 ratio to either REG1 (pegnivacogin 1 mg/kg bolus [>99% factor IXa inhibition] followed by 80% reversal with anivamersen after percutaneous coronary intervention) or bivalirudin. Exclusion criteria included ST segment elevation myocardial infarction within 48 h. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and unplanned target lesion revascularisation by day 3 after randomisation. The principal safety endpoint was major bleeding. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01848106. The trial was terminated early after enrolment of 3232 patients due to severe allergic reactions. FINDINGS 1616 patients were allocated REG1 and 1616 were assigned bivalirudin, of whom 1605 and 1601 patients, respectively, received the assigned treatment. Severe allergic reactions were reported in ten (1%) of 1605 patients receiving REG1 versus one (<1%) of 1601 patients treated with bivalirudin. The composite primary endpoint did not differ between groups, with 108 (7%) of 1616 patients assigned REG1 and 103 (6%) of 1616 allocated bivalirudin reporting a primary endpoint event (odds ratio [OR] 1·05, 95% CI 0·80-1·39; p=0·72). Major bleeding was similar between treatment groups (seven [<1%] of 1605 receiving REG1 vs two [<1%] of 1601 treated with bivalirudin; OR 3·49, 95% CI 0·73-16·82; p=0·10), but major or minor bleeding was increased with REG1 (104 [6%] vs 65 [4%]; 1·64, 1·19-2·25; p=0·002). INTERPRETATION The reversible factor IXa inhibitor REG1, as currently formulated, is associated with severe allergic reactions. Although statistical power was limited because of early termination, there was no evidence that REG1 reduced ischaemic events or bleeding compared with bivalirudin. FUNDING Regado Biosciences Inc.