The Beta Agonist Lung Injury Trial Prevention:A Randomized Controlled Trial

Rationale: Experimental studies suggest that pretreatment with b-agonists might prevent acute lung injury (ALI).

Objectives: To determine if in adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy, perioperative treatment with inhaled b-agonists effects the development of early ALI.

Methods:We conducted a randomized placebo-controlled trial in 12 UK centers (2008-2011). Adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy were allocated to prerandomized, sequentially numbered treatment packs containing inhaled salmeterol (100 mg twice daily) or a matching placebo. Patients, clinicians, and researchers were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was development of ALI within 72 hours of surgery. Secondary outcomes were ALI within 28 days, organ failure, adverse events, survival, and health-related quality of life. An exploratory substudy measured biomarkers of alveolar-capillary inflammation and injury.

Measurements and Main Results: A total of 179 patients were randomized to salmeterol and 183 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar. Treatment with salmeterol did not prevent early lung injury (32 [19.2%] of 168 vs. 27 [16.0%] of 170; odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-2.22). There was no difference in organ failure, survival, or health-related quality of life.Adverse events were less frequent in the salmeterol group (55 vs. 70; OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-0.99), predominantly because of a lower number of pneumonia (7 vs. 17; OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.96). Salmeterol reduced some biomarkers of alveolar inflammation and epithelial injury.

Conclusion: Perioperative treatment with inhaled salmeterol was well tolerated but did not prevent ALI.

Clinical trial registered with International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Register (ISRCTN47481946) and European Union database of randomized Controlled Trials (EudraCT 2007-004096-19).Copyright © 2014 by the American Thoracic Society.

Scientific standards for human intervention trials evaluating health benefits of foods, and their application to infants, children and adolescents

Associations between the consumption of particular foods and health outcomes may be indicated by observational studies. However, intervention trials that evaluate the health benefits of foods provide the strongest evidence to support dietary recommendations for health. Thus, it is important that these trials are carried out safely, and to high scientific standards. Accepted standards for the reporting of the health benefits of pharmaceutical and other medical interventions have been provided by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. However, there are no generally accepted standards for trials to evaluate the health benefits of foods. Trials with foods differ from medical trials in issues related to safety, ethics, research governance and practical implementation. Furthermore, these important issues can deter the conduct of both medical and nutrition trials in infants, children and adolescents. This paper provides standards for the planning, design, conduct, statistical analysis and interpretation of human intervention trials to evaluate the health benefits of foods that are based on the CONSORT guidelines, and outlines the key issues that need to be addressed in trials in participants in the paediatric age range.

The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: A case for a Fragility Index

Objectives

A P-value <0.05 is one metric used to evaluate the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We wondered how often statistically significant results in RCTs may be lost with small changes in the numbers of outcomes.

Study Design and Setting

A review of RCTs in high-impact medical journals that reported a statistically significant result for at least one dichotomous or time-to-event outcome in the abstract. In the group with the smallest number of events, we changed the status of patients without an event to an event until the P-value exceeded 0.05. We labeled this number the Fragility Index; smaller numbers indicated a more fragile result.

Results

The 399 eligible trials had a median sample size of 682 patients (range: 15-112,604) and a median of 112 events (range: 8-5,142); 53% reported a P-value <0.01. The median Fragility Index was 8 (range: 0-109); 25% had a Fragility Index of 3 or less. In 53% of trials, the Fragility Index was less than the number of patients lost to follow-up.

Conclusion

The statistically significant results of many RCTs hinge on small numbers of events. The Fragility Index complements the P-value and helps identify less robust results. 

An analysis of protocols and publications suggested that most discontinuations of clinical trials were not based on preplanned interim analyses or stopping rules.

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.

Randomized controlled trial of full and brief cognitive-behaviour therapy and wait-list for paediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder

Background: Reviews and practice guidelines for paediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) recommend cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) as the psychological treatment of choice, but note that it has not been sufficiently evaluated for children and adolescents and that more randomized controlled trials are needed. The aim of this trial was to evaluate effectiveness and optimal delivery of CBT, emphasizing cognitive interventions. Methods: A total of 96 children and adolescents with OCD were randomly allocated to the three conditions each of approximately 12 weeks duration: full CBT (average therapist contact: 12 sessions) and brief CBT (average contact: 5 sessions, with use of therapist-guided workbooks), and wait-list/delayed treatment. The primary outcome measure was the child version of the semi-structured interviewer-based Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. Clinical Trial registration: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN/; unique identifier: ISRCTN29092580. Results: There was statistically significant symptomatic improvement in both treatment groups compared with the wait-list group, with no significant differences in outcomes between the two treatment groups. Controlled treatment effect sizes in intention-to-treat analyses were 2.2 for full CBT and 1.6 for brief CBT. Improvements were maintained at follow-up an average of 14 weeks later. Conclusions: The findings demonstrate the benefits of CBT emphasizing cognitive interventions for children and adolescents with OCD and suggest that relatively lower therapist intensity delivery with use of therapist-guided workbooks is an efficient mode of delivery.

Flavonoid-rich fruits and vegetables improve microvascular reactivity and inflammatory status in men at risk of cardiovascular disease – FLAVURS: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Observed associations between increased fruit and vegetable (F&V) consumption, particularly those F&Vs that are rich in flavonoids, and vascular health improvements require confirmation in adequately powered randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to measure the dose-response relation between high-flavonoid (HF), low-flavonoid (LF), and habitual F&V intakes and vascular function and other cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk indicators. DESIGN: A single-blind, dose-dependent, parallel randomized controlled dietary intervention study was conducted. Male and female low-F&V consumers who had a ≥1.5-fold increased risk of CVD (n = 174) were randomly assigned to receive an HF F&V, an LF F&V, or a habitual diet, with HF and LF F&V amounts sequentially increasing by 2, 4, and 6 (+2, +4, and +6) portions/d every 6 wk over habitual intakes. Microvascular reactivity (laser Doppler imaging with iontophoresis), arterial stiffness [pulse wave velocity, pulse wave analysis (PWA)], 24-h ambulatory blood pressure, and biomarkers of nitric oxide (NO), vascular function, and inflammation were determined at baseline and at 6, 12, and 18 wk. RESULTS: In men, the HF F&V diet increased endothelium-dependent microvascular reactivity (P = 0.017) with +2 portions/d (at 6 wk) and reduced C-reactive protein (P = 0.001), E-selectin (P = 0.0005), and vascular cell adhesion molecule (P = 0.0468) with +4 portions/d (at 12 wk). HF F&Vs increased plasma NO (P = 0.0243) with +4 portions/d (at 12 wk) in the group as a whole. An increase in F&Vs, regardless of flavonoid content in the groups as a whole, mitigated increases in vascular stiffness measured by PWA (P = 0.0065) and reductions in NO (P = 0.0299) in the control group. CONCLUSION: These data support recommendations to increase F&V intake to ≥6 portions daily, with additional benefit from F&Vs that are rich in flavonoids, particularly in men with an increased risk of CVD. This trial was registered at www.controlled-trials.com as ISRCTN47748735.

A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of reports of clinical trials published in six Brazilian dental journals indexed in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO)

Introduction: Open access publishing is becoming increasingly popular within the biomedical sciences. SciELO, the Scientific Electronic Library Online, is a digital library covering a selected collection of Brazilian scientific journals many of which provide open access to full-text articles. This library includes a number of dental journals some of which may include reports of clinical trials in English, Portuguese and/or Spanish. Thus, SciELO could play an important role as a source of evidence for dental healthcare interventions especially if it yields a sizeable number of high quality reports. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify reports of clinical trials by handsearching of dental journals that are accessible through SciELO, and to assess the overall quality of these reports. Material and methods: Electronic versions of six Brazilian dental Journals indexed in SciELO were handsearched at www.scielo.br in September 2008. Reports of clinical trials were identified and classified as controlled clinical trials (CCTs - prospective, experimental studies comparing 2 or more healthcare interventions in human beings) or randomized controlled trials (RCTs - a random allocation method is clearly reported), according to Cochrane eligibility criteria. Criteria to assess methodological quality included: method of randomization, concealment of treatment allocation, blinded outcome assessment, handling of withdrawals and losses and whether an intention-to-treat analysis had been carried out. Results: The search retrieved 33 CCTs and 43 RCTs. A majority of the reports provided no description of either the method of randomization (75.3%) or concealment of the allocation sequence (84.2%). Participants and outcome assessors were reported as blinded in only 31.2% of the reports. Withdrawals and losses were only clearly described in 6.5% of the reports and none mentioned an intention-to-treat analysis or any similar procedure. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that a substantial number of reports of trials and systematic reviews are available in the dental journals listed in SciELO, and that these could provide valuable evidence for clinical decision making. However, it is clear that the quality of a number of these reports is of some concern and that improvement in the conduct and reporting of these trials could be achieved if authors adhered to internationally accepted guidelines, e. g. the CONSORT statement.

An Assessment of the Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trial Reports Published in Prosthodontic and Implant Dentistry Journals

PURPOSE The objective of this study was to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in prosthodontic and implant dentistry journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS The last 30 issues of 9 journals in the field of prosthodontic and implant dentistry (Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, Clinical Oral Implants Research, Implant Dentistry, International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry, International Journal of Prosthodontics, Journal of Dentistry, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, and Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry) were hand-searched for RCTs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and analyzed descriptively. RESULTS From the 3,667 articles screened, a total of 147 RCTs were identified and included. The number of published RCTs increased with time. The overall distribution of a high risk of bias assessment varied across the domains of the Cochrane risk of bias tool: 8% for random sequence generation, 18% for allocation concealment, 41% for masking, 47% for blinding of outcome assessment, 7% for incomplete outcome data, 12% for selective reporting, and 41% for other biases. CONCLUSION The distribution of high risk of bias for RCTs published in the selected prosthodontic and implant dentistry journals varied among journals and ranged from 8% to 47%, which can be considered as substantial.

Total disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical interbody fusion: use of the Spine Tango registry to supplement the evidence from randomized control trials.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared patient outcomes of anterior (cervical) interbody fusion (AIF) with those of total disc arthroplasty (TDA). Because RCTs have known limitations with regard to their external validity, the comparative effectiveness of the two therapies in daily practice remains unknown. PURPOSE This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes after TDA versus AIF based on data from an international spine registry. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING A retrospective analysis of registry data was carried out. PATIENT SAMPLE Inclusion criteria were degenerative disc or disc herniation of the cervical spine treated by single-level TDA or AIF, no previous surgery, and a Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) completed at baseline and at least 3 months' follow-up. Overall, 987 patients were identified. OUTCOME MEASURES Neck and arm pain relief and COMI score improvement were the outcome measures. METHODS Three separate analyses were performed to compare TDA and AIF surgical outcomes: (1) mimicking an RCT setting, with admission criteria typical of those in published RCTs, a 1:1 matched analysis was carried out in 739 patients; (2) an analysis was performed on 248 patients outside the classic RCT spectrum, that is, with one or more typical RCT exclusion criteria; (3) a subgroup analysis of all patients with additional follow-up longer than 2 years (n=149). RESULTS Matching resulted in 190 pairs with an average follow-up of 17 months that had no residual significant differences for any patient characteristics. Small but statistically significant differences in outcome were observed in favor of TDA, which are potentially clinically relevant. Subgroup analyses of atypical patients and of patients with longer-term follow-up showed no significant differences in outcome between the treatments. CONCLUSIONS The results of this observational study were in accordance with those of the published RCTs, suggesting substantial pain reduction both after AIF and TDA, with slightly greater benefit after arthroplasty. The analysis of atypical patients suggested that, in patients outside the spectrum of clinical trials, both surgical interventions appeared to work to a similar extent to that shown for the cohort in the matched study. Also, in the longer-term perspective, both therapies resulted in similar benefits to the patients.

Decision aids for people considering taking part in clinical trials

Peer reviewed

Tailored interventions based on exhaled nitric oxide versus clinical symptoms for asthma in children and adults

Background The measurement of severity and control of asthma in both children and adults can be based on subjective or objective measures. It has been advocated that fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) can be used to monitor airway inflammation as it correlates with some markers of asthma. Interventions for asthma therapies have been traditionally based on symptoms and/or spirometry. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy of tailoring asthma interventions based on exhaled nitric oxide in comparison to clinical symptoms (with or without spirometry/peak flow) for asthma related outcomes in children and adults. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and reference lists of articles. The last search was completed in February 2009. Selection criteria All randomised controlled comparisons of adjustment of asthma therapy based on exhaled nitric oxide compared to traditional methods (primarily clinical symptoms and spirometry/peak flow). Data collection and analysis Results of searches were reviewed against pre-determined criteria for inclusion. Relevant studies were independently selected in duplicate. Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Authors were contacted for further information with response from one. Main results Two studies have been added for this update, which now includes six (2 adults and 4 children/adolescent) studies; these studies differed in a variety of ways including definition of asthma exacerbations, FeNO cut off levels, the way in which FeNO was used to adjust therapy and duration of study. Of 1053 participants randomised, 1010 completed the trials. In the meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between groups for the primary outcome of asthma exacerbations or for other outcomes (clinical symptoms, FeNO level and spirometry). In post-hoc analysis, a significant reduction in mean final daily dose inhaled corticosteroid per adult was found in the group where treatment was based on FeNO in comparison to clinical symptoms, (mean difference -450 mcg; 95% CI -677 to -223 mcg budesonide equivalent/day). However, the total amount of inhaled corticosteroid used in one of the adult studies was 11% greater in the FeNO arm. In contrast, in the paediatric studies, there was a significant increase in inhaled corticosteroid dose in the FeNO strategy arm (mean difference of 140 mcg; 95% CI 29 to 251, mcg budesonide equivalent/day). Authors' conclusions Tailoring the dose of inhaled corticosteroids based on exhaled nitric oxide in comparison to clinical symptoms was carried out in different ways in the six studies and found only modest benefit at best and potentially higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids in children. The role of utilising exhaled nitric oxide to tailor the dose of inhaled corticosteroids cannot be routinely recommended for clinical practice at this stage and remains uncertain.

A systematic review and meta-analysis : tailoring asthma treatment on eosinophilic markers (exhaled nitric oxide or sputum eosinophils)

Asthma severity and control can be measured both subjectively and objectively. Traditionally asthma treatments have been individualised using symptoms and spirometry/peak flow. Increasingly treatment tailored in accordance with inflammatory markers (sputum eosinophil counts or fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) data) is advocated as an alternative strategy. The objective of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of tailoring asthma interventions based on inflammatory markers (sputum analysis and FeNO) in comparison with clinical symptoms (with or without spirometry/peak flow) for asthma-related outcomes in children and adults. Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and reference lists of articles were searched. The last searches were in February 2009. All randomised controlled comparisons of adjustment of asthma treatment based on sputum analysis or FeNO compared with traditional methods (primarily clinical symptoms and spirometry/peak flow) were selected. Results of searches were reviewed against predetermined criteria for inclusion. Relevant studies were selected, assessed and data extracted independently by at least two people. The trial authors were contacted for further information. Data were analysed as 'intervention received' and sensitivity analyses performed. Six (2 adults and 4 children/adolescent) studies utilising FeNO and three adult studies utilising sputum eosinophils were included. These studies had a degree of clinical heterogeneity including definition of asthma exacerbations, duration of study and variations in cut-off levels for percentage of sputum eosinophils and FeNO to alter management in each study. Adults who had treatment adjusted according to sputum eosinophils had a reduced number of exacerbations compared with the control group (52 vs. 77 patients with >=1 exacerbation in the study period; p=0.0006). There was no significant difference in exacerbations between groups for FeNO compared with controls. The daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids at the end of the study was decreased in adults whose treatment was based on FeNO in comparison with the control group (mean difference -450.03 mug, 95% CI -676.73 to -223.34; p<0.0001). However, children who had treatment adjusted according to FeNO had an increase in their mean daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids (mean difference 140.18 mug, 95% CI 28.94 to 251.42; p=0.014). It was concluded that tailoring of asthma treatment based on sputum eosinophils is effective in decreasing asthma exacerbations. However, tailoring of asthma treatment based on FeNO levels has not been shown to be effective in improving asthma outcomes in children and adults. At present, there is insufficient justification to advocate the routine use of either sputum analysis (due to technical expertise required) or FeNO in everyday clinical practice.

Orthodontic and orthopaedic treatment for anterior open bite in children

BackgroundAnterior open bite occurs when there is a lack of vertical overlap of the upper and lower incisors. the aetiology is multifactorial including: oral habits, unfavourable growth patterns, enlarged lymphatic tissue with mouth breathing. Several treatments have been proposed to correct this malocclusion, but interventions are not supported by strong scientific evidence.ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to evaluate orthodontic and orthopaedic treatments to correct anterior open bite in children.Search methodsThe following databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 14 February 2014); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)(The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 1); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 14 February 2014); EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 14 February 2014); LILACS via BIREME Virtual Health Library (1982 to 14 February 2014); BBO via BIREME Virtual Health Library (1980 to 14 February 2014); and SciELO (1997 to 14 February 2014). We searched for ongoing trials via ClinicalTrials.gov (to 14 February 2014). Chinese journals were handsearched and the bibliographies of papers were retrieved.Selection criteriaAll randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of orthodontic or orthopaedic treatments or both to correct anterior open bite in children.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed the eligibility of all reports identified.Risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous data. the continuous data were expressed as described by the author.Main resultsThree randomised controlled trials were included comparing: effects of Frankel's function regulator-4 (FR-4) with lip-seal training versus no treatment; repelling-magnet splints versus bite-blocks; and palatal crib associated with high-pull chincup versus no treatment.The study comparing repelling-magnet splints versus bite-blocks could not be analysed because the authors interrupted the treatment earlier than planned due to side effects in four of ten patients.FR-4 associated with lip-seal training (RR = 0.02 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.38)) and removable palatal crib associated with high-pull chincup (RR = 0.23 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.48)) were able to correct anterior open bite.No study described: randomisation process, sample size calculation, there was not blinding in the cephalometric analysis and the two studies evaluated two interventions at the same time. These results should be therefore viewed with caution.Authors' conclusionsThere is weak evidence that the interventions FR-4 with lip-seal training and palatal crib associated with high-pull chincup are able to correct anterior open bite. Given that the trials included have potential bias, these results must be viewed with caution. Recommendations for clinical practice cannot be made based only on the results of these trials. More randomised controlled trials are needed to elucidate the interventions for treating anterior open bite.

Evaluation of tumor response, disease control, progression-free survival, and time to progression as potential surrogate end points in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Overall survival (OS) can be observed only after prolonged follow-up, and any potential effect of first-line therapies on OS may be confounded by the effects of subsequent therapy. We investigated whether tumor response, disease control, progression-free survival (PFS), or time to progression (TTP) could be considered a valid surrogate for OS to assess the benefits of first-line therapies for patients with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual patient data were collected on 3,953 patients in 11 randomized trials that compared an anthracycline (alone or in combination) with a taxane (alone or in combination with an anthracycline). Surrogacy was assessed through the correlation between the end points as well as through the correlation between the treatment effects on the end points. RESULTS: Tumor response (survival odds ratio [OR], 6.2; 95% CI, 5.3 to 7.0) and disease control (survival OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 4.8 to 6.3) were strongly associated with OS. PFS (rank correlation coefficient, 0.688; 95% CI, 0.686 to 0.690) and TTP (rank correlation coefficient, 0.682; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.684) were moderately associated with OS. Response log ORs were strongly correlated with PFS log hazard ratios (linear coefficient [rho], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.19). Response and disease control log ORs and PFS and TTP log hazard ratios were poorly correlated with log hazard ratios for OS, but the confidence limits of rho were too wide to be informative. CONCLUSION: No end point could be demonstrated as a good surrogate for OS in these trials. Tumor response may be an acceptable surrogate for PFS.