Self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To assess the effect of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on glycaemic control in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sexual transmission of HIV according to viral load and antiretroviral therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: To synthesize the evidence on the risk of HIV transmission through unprotected sexual intercourse according to viral load and treatment with combination antiretroviral therapy (ART). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase and conference abstracts from 1996-2009. We included longitudinal studies of serodiscordant couples reporting on HIV transmission according to plasma viral load or use of ART and used random-effects Poisson regression models to obtain summary transmission rates [with 95% confidence intervals, (CI)]. If there were no transmission events we estimated an upper 97.5% confidence limit. RESULTS: We identified 11 cohorts reporting on 5021 heterosexual couples and 461 HIV-transmission events. The rate of transmission overall from ART-treated patients was 0.46 (95% CI 0.19-1.09) per 100 person-years, based on five events. The transmission rate from a seropositive partner with viral load below 400 copies/ml on ART, based on two studies, was zero with an upper 97.5% confidence limit of 1.27 per 100 person-years, and 0.16 (95% CI 0.02-1.13) per 100 person-years if not on ART, based on five studies and one event. There were insufficient data to calculate rates according to the presence or absence of sexually transmitted infections, condom use, or vaginal or anal intercourse. CONCLUSION: Studies of heterosexual discordant couples observed no transmission in patients treated with ART and with viral load below 400 copies/ml, but data were compatible with one transmission per 79 person-years. Further studies are needed to better define the risk of HIV transmission from patients on ART.

Individual patient data meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic studies in obstetrics, gynaecology and reproductive medicine

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice a diagnosis is based on a combination of clinical history, physical examination and additional diagnostic tests. At present, studies on diagnostic research often report the accuracy of tests without taking into account the information already known from history and examination. Due to this lack of information, together with variations in design and quality of studies, conventional meta-analyses based on these studies will not show the accuracy of the tests in real practice. By using individual patient data (IPD) to perform meta-analyses, the accuracy of tests can be assessed in relation to other patient characteristics and allows the development or evaluation of diagnostic algorithms for individual patients. In this study we will examine these potential benefits in four clinical diagnostic problems in the field of gynaecology, obstetrics and reproductive medicine. METHODS/DESIGN: Based on earlier systematic reviews for each of the four clinical problems, studies are considered for inclusion. The first authors of the included studies will be invited to participate and share their original data. After assessment of validity and completeness the acquired datasets are merged. Based on these data, a series of analyses will be performed, including a systematic comparison of the results of the IPD meta-analysis with those of a conventional meta-analysis, development of multivariable models for clinical history alone and for the combination of history, physical examination and relevant diagnostic tests and development of clinical prediction rules for the individual patients. These will be made accessible for clinicians. DISCUSSION: The use of IPD meta-analysis will allow evaluating accuracy of diagnostic tests in relation to other relevant information. Ultimately, this could increase the efficiency of the diagnostic work-up, e.g. by reducing the need for invasive tests and/or improving the accuracy of the diagnostic workup. This study will assess whether these benefits of IPD meta-analysis over conventional meta-analysis can be exploited and will provide a framework for future IPD meta-analyses in diagnostic and prognostic research.

The efficacy of psychological interventions for infertile patients: a meta-analysis examining mental health and pregnancy rate

BACKGROUND: Psychological interventions for infertile patients seek to improve mental health and increase pregnancy rates. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to examine if psychological interventions improve mental health and pregnancy rate among infertile patients. Thus, controlled studies were pooled investigating psychological interventions following the introduction of assisted reproductive treatments (ART). METHODS: The databases of Medline, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant articles published between 1978 and 2007 (384 articles). Included were prospective intervention studies on infertile patients (women and men) receiving psychological interventions independent of actual medical treatment. The outcome measures were mental health and pregnancy rate. A total of 21 controlled studies were ultimately included in a meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of psychological interventions. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for psychological measures and risk ratios (RR) for pregnancy rate. RESULTS: The findings from controlled studies indicated no significant effect for psychological interventions regarding mental health (depression: ES 0.02, 99% CI: -0.19, 0.24; anxiety: ES 0.16, 99% CI: -0.10, 0.42; mental distress: ES 0.08, 99% CI: -0.10, 0.51). Nevertheless, there was evidence for the positive impact of psychological interventions on pregnancy rates (RR 1.42, 99% CI: 1.02, 1.96). Concerning pregnancy rates, significant effects for psychological interventions were only found for couples not receiving ART. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the absence of clinical effects on mental health measures, psychological interventions were found to improve some patients' chances of becoming pregnant. Psychological interventions represent an attractive treatment option, in particular, for infertile patients who are not receiving medical treatment.

Erythropoietin or Darbepoetin for patients with cancer--meta-analysis based on individual patient data

BACKGROUND: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) reduce anemia in cancer patients and may improve quality of life, but there are concerns that ESAs might increase mortality. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to examine the effect of ESAs and identify factors that modify the effects of ESAs on overall survival, progression free survival, thromboembolic and cardiovascular events as well as need for transfusions and other important safety and efficacy outcomes in cancer patients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and conference proceedings for eligible trials. Manufacturers of ESAs were contacted to identify additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin or darbepoetin plus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) versus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) alone, to prevent or treat anemia in adult or pediatric cancer patients with or without concurrent antineoplastic therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin alpha, epoetin beta or darbepoetin alpha plus red blood cell transfusions versus transfusion alone, for prophylaxis or therapy of anemia while or after receiving anti-cancer treatment. Patient-level data were obtained and analyzed by independent statisticians at two academic departments, using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analysis. Analyses were according to the intention-to-treat principle. Primary endpoints were on study mortality and overall survival during the longest available follow-up, regardless of anticancer treatment, and in patients receiving chemotherapy. Tests for interactions were used to identify differences in effects of ESAs on mortality across pre-specified subgroups. The present review reports only the results for the primary endpoint. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 13933 cancer patients from 53 trials were analyzed, 1530 patients died on-study and 4993 overall. ESAs increased on study mortality (combined hazard ratio [cHR] 1.17; 95% CI 1.06-1.30) and worsened overall survival (cHR 1.06; 95% CI 1.00-1.12), with little heterogeneity between trials (I(2) 0%, p=0.87 and I(2) 7.1%, p=0.33, respectively). Thirty-eight trials enrolled 10441 patients receiving chemotherapy. The cHR for on study mortality was 1.10 (95% CI 0.98-1.24) and 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.11) for overall survival. There was little evidence for a difference between trials of patients receiving different cancer treatments (P for interaction=0.42). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ESA treatment in cancer patients increased on study mortality and worsened overall survival. For patients undergoing chemotherapy the increase was less pronounced, but an adverse effect could not be excluded.

Recombinant human erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and mortality in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents reduce anaemia in patients with cancer and could improve their quality of life, but these drugs might increase mortality. We therefore did a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in which these drugs plus red blood cell transfusions were compared with transfusion alone for prophylaxis or treatment of anaemia in patients with cancer. METHODS: Data for patients treated with epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, or darbepoetin alfa were obtained and analysed by independent statisticians using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analysis. Analyses were by intention to treat. Primary endpoints were mortality during the active study period and overall survival during the longest available follow-up, irrespective of anticancer treatment, and in patients given chemotherapy. Tests for interactions were used to identify differences in effects of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents on mortality across prespecified subgroups. FINDINGS: Data from a total of 13 933 patients with cancer in 53 trials were analysed. 1530 patients died during the active study period and 4993 overall. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents increased mortality during the active study period (combined hazard ratio [cHR] 1.17, 95% CI 1.06-1.30) and worsened overall survival (1.06, 1.00-1.12), with little heterogeneity between trials (I(2) 0%, p=0.87 for mortality during the active study period, and I(2) 7.1%, p=0.33 for overall survival). 10 441 patients on chemotherapy were enrolled in 38 trials. The cHR for mortality during the active study period was 1.10 (0.98-1.24), and 1.04 (0.97-1.11) for overall survival. There was little evidence for a difference between trials of patients given different anticancer treatments (p for interaction=0.42). INTERPRETATION: Treatment with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients with cancer increased mortality during active study periods and worsened overall survival. The increased risk of death associated with treatment with these drugs should be balanced against their benefits. FUNDING: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Medical Faculty of University of Cologne, and Oncosuisse (Switzerland).

Mortality of patients lost to follow-up in antiretroviral treatment programmes in resource-limited settings: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The retention of patients in antiretroviral therapy (ART) programmes is an important issue in resource-limited settings. Loss to follow up can be substantial, but it is unclear what the outcomes are in patients who are lost to programmes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Indian Medlars Centre (IndMed) and African Index Medicus (AIM) databases and the abstracts of three conferences for studies that traced patients lost to follow up to ascertain their vital status. Main outcomes were the proportion of patients traced, the proportion found to be alive and the proportion that had died. Where available, we also examined the reasons why some patients could not be traced, why patients found to be alive did not return to the clinic, and the causes of death. We combined mortality data from several studies using random-effects meta-analysis. Seventeen studies were eligible. All were from sub-Saharan Africa, except one study from India, and none were conducted in children. A total of 6420 patients (range 44 to 1343 patients) were included. Patients were traced using telephone calls, home visits and through social networks. Overall the vital status of 4021 patients could be ascertained (63%, range across studies: 45% to 86%); 1602 patients had died. The combined mortality was 40% (95% confidence interval 33%-48%), with substantial heterogeneity between studies (P<0.0001). Mortality in African programmes ranged from 12% to 87% of patients lost to follow-up. Mortality was inversely associated with the rate of loss to follow up in the programme: it declined from around 60% to 20% as the percentage of patients lost to the programme increased from 5% to 50%. Among patients not found, telephone numbers and addresses were frequently incorrect or missing. Common reasons for not returning to the clinic were transfer to another programme, financial problems and improving or deteriorating health. Causes of death were available for 47 deaths: 29 (62%) died of an AIDS defining illness. CONCLUSIONS: In ART programmes in resource-limited settings a substantial minority of adults lost to follow up cannot be traced, and among those traced 20% to 60% had died. Our findings have implications both for patient care and the monitoring and evaluation of programmes.

Lifestyle factors and colorectal cancer risk (1): systematic review and meta-analysis of associations with body mass index

OBJECTIVE: Excess body weight, defined by body mass index (BMI), may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. As a prerequisite to the determination of lifestyle attributable risks, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies to quantify colorectal cancer risk associated with increased BMI and explore for differences by gender, sub-site and study characteristics. METHOD: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (to December 2007), and other sources, selecting reports based on strict inclusion criteria. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions of study-specific incremental estimates were performed to determine the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) associated with a 5 kg/m(2) increase in BMI. RESULTS: We analysed 29 datasets from 28 articles, including 67,361 incident cases. Higher BMI was associated with colon (RR 1.24, 95% CIs: 1.20-1.28) and rectal (1.09, 1.05-1.14) cancers in men, and with colon cancer (1.09, 1.04-1.12) in women. Associations were stronger in men than in women for colon (P < 0.001) and rectal (P = 0.005) cancers. Associations were generally consistent across geographic populations. Study characteristics and adjustments accounted for only moderate variations of associations. CONCLUSION: Increasing BMI is associated with a modest increased risk of developing colon and rectal cancers, but this modest risk may translate to large attributable proportions in high-prevalence obese populations. Inter-gender differences point to potentially important mechanistic differences, which merit further research.

The importance of allocation concealment and patient blinding in osteoarthritis trials: a meta-epidemiologic study

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of adequate allocation concealment and patient blinding with estimates of treatment benefits in osteoarthritis trials. METHODS: We performed a meta-epidemiologic study of 16 meta-analyses with 175 trials that compared therapeutic interventions with placebo or nonintervention control in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. We calculated effect sizes from the differences in means of pain intensity between groups at the end of followup divided by the pooled SD and compared effect sizes between trials with and trials without adequate methodology. RESULTS: Effect sizes tended to be less beneficial in 46 trials with adequate allocation concealment compared with 112 trials with inadequate or unclear concealment of allocation (difference -0.15; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.31, 0.02). Selection bias associated with inadequate or unclear concealment of allocation was most pronounced in meta-analyses with large estimated treatment benefits (P for interaction < 0.001), meta-analyses with high between-trial heterogeneity (P = 0.009), and meta-analyses of complementary medicine (P = 0.019). Effect sizes tended to be less beneficial in 64 trials with adequate blinding of patients compared with 58 trials without (difference -0.15; 95% CI -0.39, 0.09), but differences were less consistent and disappeared after accounting for allocation concealment. Detection bias associated with a lack of adequate patient blinding was most pronounced for nonpharmacologic interventions (P for interaction < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Results of osteoarthritis trials may be affected by selection and detection bias. Adequate concealment of allocation and attempts to blind patients will minimize these biases.

The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study

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.

Disagreements in meta-analyses using outcomes measured on continuous or rating scales: observer agreement study

OBJECTIVE: To study the inter-observer variation related to extraction of continuous and numerical rating scale data from trial reports for use in meta-analyses. DESIGN: Observer agreement study. DATA SOURCES: A random sample of 10 Cochrane reviews that presented a result as a standardised mean difference (SMD), the protocols for the reviews and the trial reports (n=45) were retrieved. DATA EXTRACTION: Five experienced methodologists and five PhD students independently extracted data from the trial reports for calculation of the first SMD result in each review. The observers did not have access to the reviews but to the protocols, where the relevant outcome was highlighted. The agreement was analysed at both trial and meta-analysis level, pairing the observers in all possible ways (45 pairs, yielding 2025 pairs of trials and 450 pairs of meta-analyses). Agreement was defined as SMDs that differed less than 0.1 in their point estimates or confidence intervals. RESULTS: The agreement was 53% at trial level and 31% at meta-analysis level. Including all pairs, the median disagreement was SMD=0.22 (interquartile range 0.07-0.61). The experts agreed somewhat more than the PhD students at trial level (61% v 46%), but not at meta-analysis level. Important reasons for disagreement were differences in selection of time points, scales, control groups, and type of calculations; whether to include a trial in the meta-analysis; and data extraction errors made by the observers. In 14 out of the 100 SMDs calculated at the meta-analysis level, individual observers reached different conclusions than the originally published review. CONCLUSIONS: Disagreements were common and often larger than the effect of commonly used treatments. Meta-analyses using SMDs are prone to observer variation and should be interpreted with caution. The reliability of meta-analyses might be improved by having more detailed review protocols, more than one observer, and statistical expertise.

Ausschluss von Patienten aus der Analyse: Auswirkungen auf die Ergebnisse randomisierter kontrollierter Studien: Eine meta-epidemiologische Studie

Zielsetzung: Untersuchung, ob der Ausschluss von Patienten aus der statistischen Analyse in randomisierten Studien mit Fehlbewertungen der Wirksamkeit von Behandlungen sowie einer größeren Heterogenität zwischen verschiedenen Studien assoziiert ist. Studiendesign: Meta-epidemiologische Studie auf der Basis einer Sammlung von Metaanalysen randomisierter Studien. Datenquellen: 14 Metaanalysen, die insgesamt 167 Studien berücksichtigten. Diese verglichen die Wirksamkeit therapeutischer Interventionen bei Arthrose des Knie- oder Hüftgelenks mit Kontrollgruppen, die entweder keine Intervention oder Placebo erhielten und verwendeten jeweils Schmerz nach Angaben der Patienten als Endpunkt. Methoden: Zur Berechnung der Effektgrößen wurden die Unterschiede in der durchschnittlichen Schmerzintensität zwischen den Gruppen am Ende durch die gepoolte Standardabweichung dividiert. Die statistische Zusammenfassung der Studien erfolgte durch eine Random-Effects-Metaanalyse. Studien mit und Studien ohne Ausschluss von Patienten aus der statistischen Analyse wurden in Bezug auf die Bewertung der Therapiewirksamkeit gegeneinander verglichen, und die Auswirkungen einer Beschränkung von Metaanalysen auf Studien ohne Patientenausschluss wurden berechnet. Ergebnisse: In 39 Studien (23 %) waren sämtliche Patienten in die Analyse eingeschlossen. In 128 Studien (77 %) wurden Patienten von der Analyse ausgeschlossen. Die Effektgrößen waren in Studien mit Patientenausschluss tendenziell vorteilhafter als in Studien ohne Patientenausschluss (Differenz –0,13; 95-%-Konfidenzintervall –0,29 bis 0,04). Allerdings variierten die Schätzungen der Verzerrung zwischen einzelnen Metaanalysen erheblich (τ2 = 0,07). Untersuchungen der Interaktion zwischen Ausschluss aus der Analyse und Bewertung der Therapiewirksamkeit waren in fünf Metaanalysen positiv. Stratifizierte Analysen zeigten, dass Unterschiede in Bezug auf Effektgrößen zwischen Studien mit versus Studien ohne Patientenausschluss stärker ausfielen in Metaanalysen mit großer Heterogenität zwischen den einzelnen Studien, in Metaanalysen mit großer geschätzter Therapiewirksamkeit und in Metaanalysen aus dem Bereich der Komplementärmedizin. Beschränkten sich die Metaanalysen auf Studien ohne Patientenausschluss, resultierte dies in geringerer geschätzter Therapiewirksamkeit, größeren p-Werten und einer beträchtlichen Minderung der Heterogenität zwischen den einzelnen Studien. Schlussfolgerungen: Der Ausschluss von Patienten aus der statistischen Analyse in randomisierten Studien führt häufig zu Fehleinschätzungen der Therapiewirkungen. Ausmaß und Richtung dieser Verzerrung sind jedoch unvorhersehbar. Berichte randomisierter Studien sollten grundsätzlich Ergebnisse von Intention-to-treat-Analysen nennen. Systematische Übersichtsarbeiten sollten den Einfluss des Patientenausschlusses von der statistischen Analyse auf die Bewertung der Therapiewirksamkeit routinemäßig prüfen.