Addressing missing participant outcome data in dental clinical trials

Missing outcome data are common in clinical trials and despite a well-designed study protocol, some of the randomized participants may leave the trial early without providing any or all of the data, or may be excluded after randomization. Premature discontinuation causes loss of information, potentially resulting in attrition bias leading to problems during interpretation of trial findings. The causes of information loss in a trial, known as mechanisms of missingness, may influence the credibility of the trial results. Analysis of trials with missing outcome data should ideally be handled with intention to treat (ITT) rather than per protocol (PP) analysis. However, true ITT analysis requires appropriate assumptions and imputation of missing data. Using a worked example from a published dental study, we highlight the key issues associated with missing outcome data in clinical trials, describe the most recognized approaches to handling missing outcome data, and explain the principles of ITT and PP analysis.

A 2-year multicentre, open-label, randomized, controlled study of growth hormone (Genotropin(®) ) treatment in very young children born small for gestational age: Early Growth and Neurodevelopment (EGN) Study

OBJECTIVE In Europe, growth hormone (GH) treatment for children born small for gestational age (SGA) can only be initiated after 4 years of age. However, younger age at treatment initiation is a predictor of favourable response. To assess the effect of GH treatment on early growth and cognitive functioning in very young (<30 months), short-stature children born SGA. DESIGN A 2-year, randomized controlled, multicentre study (NCT00627523; EGN study), in which patients received either GH treatment or no treatment for 24 months. PATIENTS Children aged 19-29 months diagnosed as SGA at birth, and for whom sufficient early growth data were available, were eligible. Patients were randomized (1:1) to GH treatment (Genotropin(®) , Pfizer Inc.) at a dose of 0·035 mg/kg/day by subcutaneous injection, or no treatment. MEASUREMENTS The primary objective was to assess the change from baseline in height standard deviation score (SDS) after 24 months of GH treatment. RESULTS Change from baseline in height SDS was significantly greater in the GH treatment vs control group at both month 12 (1·03 vs 0·14) and month 24 (1·63 vs 0·43; both P < 0·001). Growth velocity SDS was significantly higher in the GH treatment vs control group at 12 months (P < 0·001), but not at 24 months. There was no significant difference in mental or psychomotor development indices between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS GH treatment for 24 months in very young short-stature children born SGA resulted in a significant increase in height SDS compared with no treatment.