Timing and Completeness of Trial Results Posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and Published in Journals

Background

The US Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act requires results from clinical trials of Food and Drug Administration–approved drugs to be posted at ClinicalTrials.gov within 1 y after trial completion. We compared the timing and completeness of results of drug trials posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and published in journals.

Methods and Findings

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov on March 27, 2012, for randomized controlled trials of drugs with posted results. For a random sample of these trials, we searched PubMed for corresponding publications. Data were extracted independently from ClinicalTrials.gov and from the published articles for trials with results both posted and published. We assessed the time to first public posting or publishing of results and compared the completeness of results posted at ClinicalTrials.gov versus published in journal articles. Completeness was defined as the reporting of all key elements, according to three experts, for the flow of participants, efficacy results, adverse events, and serious adverse events (e.g., for adverse events, reporting of the number of adverse events per arm, without restriction to statistically significant differences between arms for all randomized patients or for those who received at least one treatment dose).From the 600 trials with results posted at ClinicalTrials.gov, we randomly sampled 50% (n = 297) had no corresponding published article. For trials with both posted and published results (n = 202), the median time between primary completion date and first results publicly posted was 19 mo (first quartile = 14, third quartile = 30 mo), and the median time between primary completion date and journal publication was 21 mo (first quartile = 14, third quartile = 28 mo). Reporting was significantly more complete at ClinicalTrials.gov than in the published article for the flow of participants (64% versus 48% of trials, p<0.001), efficacy results (79% versus 69%, p = 0.02), adverse events (73% versus 45%, p<0.001), and serious adverse events (99% versus 63%, p<0.001).The main study limitation was that we considered only the publication describing the results for the primary outcomes.

Conclusions

Our results highlight the need to search ClinicalTrials.gov for both unpublished and published trials. Trial results, especially serious adverse events, are more completely reported at ClinicalTrials.gov than in the published article. Please see later in the article for the Editors'' Summary     

Impact of Inclusion of Industry Trial Results Registries as an Information Source for Systematic Reviews

Background

Clinical trial results registries may contain relevant unpublished information. Our main aim was to investigate the potential impact of the inclusion of reports from industry results registries on systematic reviews (SRs).

Methods

We identified a sample of 150 eligible SRs in PubMed via backward selection. Eligible SRs investigated randomized controlled trials of drugs and included at least 2 bibliographic databases (original search date: 11/2009). We checked whether results registries of manufacturers and/or industry associations had also been searched. If not, we searched these registries for additional trials not considered in the SRs, as well as for additional data on trials already considered. We reanalysed the primary outcome and harm outcomes reported in the SRs and determined whether results had changed. A “change” was defined as either a new relevant result or a change in the statistical significance of an existing result. We performed a search update in 8/2013 and identified a sample of 20 eligible SRs to determine whether mandatory results registration from 9/2008 onwards in the public trial and results registry ClinicalTrials.gov had led to its inclusion as a standard information source in SRs, and whether the inclusion rate of industry results registries had changed.

Results

133 of the 150 SRs (89%) in the original analysis did not search industry results registries. For 23 (17%) of these SRs we found 25 additional trials and additional data on 31 trials already included in the SRs. This additional information was found for more than twice as many SRs of drugs approved from 2000 as approved beforehand. The inclusion of the additional trials and data yielded changes in existing results or the addition of new results for 6 of the 23 SRs. Of the 20 SRs retrieved in the search update, 8 considered ClinicalTrials.gov or a meta-registry linking to ClinicalTrials.gov, and 1 considered an industry results registry.

Conclusion

The inclusion of industry and public results registries as an information source in SRs is still insufficient and may result in publication and outcome reporting bias. In addition to an essential search in ClinicalTrials.gov, authors of SRs should consider searching industry results registries.     

Ten Years after the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ Clinical Trial Registration Initiative,One Quarter of Phase 3 Pediatric Epilepsy Clinical Trials Still Remain Unpublished: A Cross Sectional Analysis

Introduction

Although selective reporting of clinical trial results introduces bias into evidence based clinical decision making, publication bias in pediatric epilepsy is unknown today. Since there is a considerable ambiguity in the treatment of an important and common clinical problem, pediatric seizures, we assessed the public availability of results of phase 3 clinical trials that evaluated treatments of seizures in children and adolescents as a surrogate for the extent of publication bias in pediatric epilepsy.

Methods

We determined the proportion of published and unpublished study results of phase 3 clinical trials that were registered as completed on ClinicalTrials.gov. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and Google Scholar for publications and contacted principal investigators or sponsors. The analysis was performed according to STROBE criteria.

Results

Considering studies that were completed before 2014 (N = 99), 75 (76%) pediatric phase 3 clinical trials were published but 24 (24%) remained unpublished. The unpublished studies concealed evidence from 4,437 patients. Mean time-to-publication was 25 SD ± 15.6 months, more than twice as long as mandated.

Conclusion

Ten years after the ICMJE’s clinical trials registration initiative there is still a considerable amount of selective reporting and delay of publication that potentially distorts the body of evidence in the treatment of pediatric seizures.     

Trial Publication after Registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Background

ClinicalTrials.gov is a publicly accessible, Internet-based registry of clinical trials managed by the US National Library of Medicine that has the potential to address selective trial publication. Our objectives were to examine completeness of registration within ClinicalTrials.gov and to determine the extent and correlates of selective publication.

Methods and Findings

We examined reporting of registration information among a cross-section of trials that had been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov after December 31, 1999 and updated as having been completed by June 8, 2007, excluding phase I trials. We then determined publication status among a random 10% subsample by searching MEDLINE using a systematic protocol, after excluding trials completed after December 31, 2005 to allow at least 2 y for publication following completion. Among the full sample of completed trials (n = 7,515), nearly 100% reported all data elements mandated by ClinicalTrials.gov, such as intervention and sponsorship. Optional data element reporting varied, with 53% reporting trial end date, 66% reporting primary outcome, and 87% reporting trial start date. Among the 10% subsample, less than half (311 of 677, 46%) of trials were published, among which 96 (31%) provided a citation within ClinicalTrials.gov of a publication describing trial results. Trials primarily sponsored by industry (40%, 144 of 357) were less likely to be published when compared with nonindustry/nongovernment sponsored trials (56%, 110 of 198; p<0.001), but there was no significant difference when compared with government sponsored trials (47%, 57 of 122; p = 0.22). Among trials that reported an end date, 75 of 123 (61%) completed prior to 2004, 50 of 96 (52%) completed during 2004, and 62 of 149 (42%) completed during 2005 were published (p = 0.006).

Conclusions

Reporting of optional data elements varied and publication rates among completed trials registered within ClinicalTrials.gov were low. Without greater attention to reporting of all data elements, the potential for ClinicalTrials.gov to address selective publication of clinical trials will be limited. Please see later in the article for the Editors'' Summary     

Likelihood of Null Effects of Large NHLBI Clinical Trials Has Increased over Time

Background

We explore whether the number of null results in large National Heart Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) funded trials has increased over time.

Methods

We identified all large NHLBI supported RCTs between 1970 and 2012 evaluating drugs or dietary supplements for the treatment or prevention of cardiovascular disease. Trials were included if direct costs >$500,000/year, participants were adult humans, and the primary outcome was cardiovascular risk, disease or death. The 55 trials meeting these criteria were coded for whether they were published prior to or after the year 2000, whether they registered in clinicaltrials.gov prior to publication, used active or placebo comparator, and whether or not the trial had industry co-sponsorship. We tabulated whether the study reported a positive, negative, or null result on the primary outcome variable and for total mortality.

Results

17 of 30 studies (57%) published prior to 2000 showed a significant benefit of intervention on the primary outcome in comparison to only 2 among the 25 (8%) trials published after 2000 (χ²=12.2,df= 1, p=0.0005). There has been no change in the proportion of trials that compared treatment to placebo versus active comparator. Industry co-sponsorship was unrelated to the probability of reporting a significant benefit. Pre-registration in clinical trials.gov was strongly associated with the trend toward null findings.

Conclusions

The number NHLBI trials reporting positive results declined after the year 2000. Prospective declaration of outcomes in RCTs, and the adoption of transparent reporting standards, as required by clinicaltrials.gov, may have contributed to the trend toward null findings.     

Differences in Investigator-Initiated Trials between Japan and Other Countries: Analyses of Clinical Trials Sponsored by Academia and Government in the ClinicalTrials.gov Registry and in the Three Japanese Registries

Background

Following the amendment of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law in Japan in 2003 researchers were permitted to begin investigator-initiated trials (IITs). In subsequent years, however, the number of IITs remained low. In other countries in Asia as well as in Europe, North America, and South Africa, the number of IITs has increased over the past decade. The differences in the characteristics of IITs between Japan and other countries are unknown. Some studies have analyzed the characteristics of all clinical trials according to registry databases, but there has been less research focusing on IITs.

Aims

The purpose of this study is to analyze the characteristics of IITs in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry and in the three Japanese registries, to identify differences in IITs between Japan and other countries.

Methods

Using Thomson Reuters Pharma™, trials sponsored by academia and government as IITs in 2010 and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov were identified. IITs from 2004 to 2012 in Japan were identified in the three Japanese registries: the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry, the Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center Clinical Trials Information, and the Japan Medical Association Center for Clinical Trials, Clinical Trials Registry. Characterization was made of the trial purposes, phases, participants, masking, arms, design, controls, and other data.

Results

New and revised IITs registered in ClinicalTrials.gov during 2010 averaged about 40% of all sponsor-identified trials. IITs were nearly all early-phase studies with small numbers of participants. A total of 56 Japanese IITs were found over a period of 8 years, and these were also almost nearly all early-phase studies with small numbers of participants.

Conclusion

There appear to be no great differences between Japan and other countries in terms of characteristics of IITs. These results should prompt a new review of the IIT environment in Japan.     

Poor reporting of scientific leadership information in clinical trial registers

Background

In September 2004, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) issued a Statement requiring that all clinical trials be registered at inception in a public register in order to be considered for publication. The World Health Organization (WHO) and ICMJE have identified 20 items that should be provided before a trial is considered registered, including contact information. Identifying those scientifically responsible for trial conduct increases accountability. The objective is to examine the proportion of registered clinical trials providing valid scientific leadership information.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We reviewed clinical trial entries listing Canadian investigators in the two largest international and public trial registers, the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) register, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The main outcome measures were the proportion of clinical trials reporting valid contact information for the trials'' Principal Investigator (PI)/Co-ordinating Investigator/Study Chair/Site PI, and trial e-mail contact address, stratified by funding source, recruiting status, and register. A total of 1388 entries (142 from ISRCTN and 1246 from ClinicalTrials.gov) comprised our sample. We found non-compliance with mandatory registration requirements regarding scientific leadership and trial contact information. Non-industry and partial industry funded trials were significantly more likely to identify the individual responsible for scientific leadership (OR = 259, 95% CI: 95–701) and to provide a contact e-mail address (OR = 9.6, 95% CI: 6.6–14) than were solely industry funded trials.

Conclusions/Significance

Despite the requirements set by WHO and ICMJE, data on scientific leadership and contact e-mail addresses are frequently omitted from clinical trials registered in the two leading public clinical trial registers. To promote accountability and transparency in clinical trials research, public clinical trials registers should ensure adequate monitoring of trial registration to ensure completion of mandatory contact information fields identifying scientific leadership     

(In)Consistencies in Responses to Sodium Bicarbonate Supplementation: A Randomised,Repeated Measures,Counterbalanced and Double-Blind Study

Objectives

Intervention studies do not account for high within-individual variation potentially compromising the magnitude of an effect. Repeat administration of a treatment allows quantification of individual responses and determination of the consistency of responses. We determined the consistency of metabolic and exercise responses following repeated administration of sodium bicarbonate (SB).

Design and Methods

15 physically active males (age 25±4 y; body mass 76.0±7.3 kg; height 1.77±0.05 m) completed six cycling capacity tests at 110% of maximum power output (CCT_110%) following ingestion of either 0.3 g∙kg^-1BM of SB (4 trials) or placebo (PL, 2 trials). Blood pH, bicarbonate, base excess and lactate were determined at baseline, pre-exercise, post-exercise and 5-min post-exercise. Total work done (TWD) was recorded as the exercise outcome.

Results

SB supplementation increased blood pH, bicarbonate and base excess prior to every trial (all p ≤ 0.001); absolute changes in pH, bicarbonate and base excess from baseline to pre-exercise were similar in all SB trials (all p > 0.05). Blood lactate was elevated following exercise in all trials (p ≤ 0.001), and was higher in some, but not all, SB trials compared to PL. TWD was not significantly improved with SB vs. PL in any trial (SB1: +3.6%; SB2 +0.3%; SB3: +2.1%; SB4: +6.7%; all p > 0.05), although magnitude-based inferences suggested a 93% likely improvement in SB4. Individual analysis showed ten participants improved in at least one SB trial above the normal variation of the test although five improved in none.

Conclusions

The mechanism for improved exercise with SB was consistently in place prior to exercise, although this only resulted in a likely improvement in one trial. SB does not consistently improve high intensity cycling capacity, with results suggesting that caution should be taken when interpreting the results from single trials as to the efficacy of SB supplementation.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02474628     

ClinicalTrials.gov as a Data Source for Semi-Automated Point-Of-Care Trial Eligibility Screening

Background

Implementing semi-automated processes to efficiently match patients to clinical trials at the point of care requires both detailed patient data and authoritative information about open studies.

Objective

To evaluate the utility of the ClinicalTrials.gov registry as a data source for semi-automated trial eligibility screening.

Methods

Eligibility criteria and metadata for 437 trials open for recruitment in four different clinical domains were identified in ClinicalTrials.gov. Trials were evaluated for up to date recruitment status and eligibility criteria were evaluated for obstacles to automated interpretation. Finally, phone or email outreach to coordinators at a subset of the trials was made to assess the accuracy of contact details and recruitment status.

Results

24% (104 of 437) of trials declaring on open recruitment status list a study completion date in the past, indicating out of date records. Substantial barriers to automated eligibility interpretation in free form text are present in 81% to up to 94% of all trials. We were unable to contact coordinators at 31% (45 of 146) of the trials in the subset, either by phone or by email. Only 53% (74 of 146) would confirm that they were still recruiting patients.

Conclusion

Because ClinicalTrials.gov has entries on most US and many international trials, the registry could be repurposed as a comprehensive trial matching data source. Semi-automated point of care recruitment would be facilitated by matching the registry''s eligibility criteria against clinical data from electronic health records. But the current entries fall short. Ultimately, improved techniques in natural language processing will facilitate semi-automated complex matching. As immediate next steps, we recommend augmenting ClinicalTrials.gov data entry forms to capture key eligibility criteria in a simple, structured format.     

A Clinical Trial to Introduce Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Areas of High Prevalence in the Dominican Republic

Background

Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision (VMMC) is an effective strategy to reduce the risk of HIV infection. Studies conducted in the Dominican Republic (DR) suggest that acceptability of VMMC among men may be as high as 67%. The goal of this clinical trial was to assess the acceptability, uptake and safety for VMMC services in two areas of high HIV prevalence in the country.

Methods

This was a single-arm, non-randomized, pragmatic clinical trial. Study personnel received background information about the risks and benefits of VMMC and practical training on the surgical technique. A native speaking research assistant administered a questionnaire of demographics, sexual practices and knowledge about VMMC. One week after the surgery, participants returned for wound inspection and to answer questions about their post-surgical experience.

Results

539 men consented for the study. Fifty seven were excluded from participation for medical or anatomical reasons and 28 decided not to have the procedure after providing consent. A total of 454 men were circumcised using the Forceps Guided Method Under Local Anesthesia. The rate of adverse events (AE) was 4.4% (20% moderate, 80% mild). There were no serious AEs and all complications resolved promptly with treatment. Eighty eight percent of clients reported being “very satisfied” and 12% were “somewhat satisfied” with the outcome at the one-week postoperative visit.

Conclusions

Recruitment and uptake were satisfactory. Client satisfaction with VMMC was high and the rate of AEs was low. Roll out of VMMC in targeted areas of the DR is feasible and should be considered.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02337179     

High Platelet Reactivity in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Prasugrel and Clopidogrel

Background

Prasugrel is more effective than clopidogrel in reducing platelet aggregation in acute coronary syndromes. Data available on prasugrel reloading in clopidogrel treated patients with high residual platelet reactivity (HRPR) i.e. poor responders, is limited.

Objectives

To determine the effects of prasugrel loading on platelet function in patients on clopidogrel and high platelet reactivity undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Patients

Patients with ACS on clopidogrel who were scheduled for PCI found to have a platelet reactivity ≥40 AUC with the Multiplate Analyzer, i.e. “poor responders” were randomised to prasugrel (60 mg loading and 10 mg maintenance dose) or clopidogrel (600 mg reloading and 150 mg maintenance dose). The primary outcome measure was proportion of patients with platelet reactivity <40 AUC 4 hours after loading with study medication, and also at one hour (secondary outcome). 44 patients were enrolled and the study was terminated early as clopidogrel use decreased sharply due to introduction of newer P2Y12 inhibitors.

Results

At 4 hours after study medication 100% of patients treated with prasugrel compared to 91% of those treated with clopidogrel had platelet reactivity <40 AUC (p = 0.49), while at 1 hour the proportions were 95% and 64% respectively (p = 0.02). Mean platelet reactivity at 4 and 1 hours after study medication in prasugrel and clopidogrel groups respectively were 12 versus 22 (p = 0.005) and 19 versus 34 (p = 0.01) respectively.

Conclusions

Routine platelet function testing identifies patients with high residual platelet reactivity (“poor responders”) on clopidogrel. A strategy of prasugrel rather than clopidogrel reloading results in earlier and more sustained suppression of platelet reactivity. Future trials need to identify if this translates into clinical benefit.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01339026     

Endovascular Treatment with Stent-Retriever Devices for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Importance

Acute ischemic stroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Several recent clinical trials have shown that endovascular treatment improves clinical outcomes among patients with acute ischemic stroke.

Objective

To provide an overall and precise estimate of the efficacy of endovascular treatment predominantly using second-generation mechanical thrombectomy devices (stent-retriever devices) compared to medical management on clinical and functional outcomes among patients with acute ischemic stroke.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Science, and NIH ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through November 2015.

Study Selection

Searches returned 3,045 articles. After removal of duplicates, two authors independently screened titles and abstracts to assess eligibility of 2,495 potentially relevant publications. From these, 38 full-text publications were more closely assessed. Finally, 5 randomized controlled trials of endovascular treatment with predominant use of retrievable stents were selected.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Three authors independently extracted information on participant and trial characteristics and clinical events using a standardized protocol. Random effects models were used to pool endovascular treatment effects across outcomes.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was better functional outcome as measured on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and symptomatic intra-cerebral hemorrhage.

Results

Five trials representing 1,287 patients were included. Overall, patients randomized to endovascular therapy experienced 2.22 times greater odds of better functional outcome compared to those randomized to medical management (95% CI, 1.66 to 2.98; P < 0.0001). Endovascular therapy was not associated with mortality [OR (95% CI), 0.78 (0.54, 1.12); P = 0.1056] or symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage [OR (95% CI), 1.19 (0.69, 2.05); P = 0.5348]. Meta-regression analysis suggested that shorter times from stroke onset to groin puncture and from stroke onset to reperfusion result in better functional outcomes in ischemic stroke patients (P = 0.0077 and P = 0.0089). There were no significant differences in the beneficial effects of endovascular treatment on functional outcomes across categories of gender, age, stroke severity, ischemic changes on computed tomography, or intravenous tissue plasminogen activator administration.

Conclusions and Relevance

This meta-analysis demonstrated superior functional outcomes in subjects receiving endovascular treatment compared to medical management. Further, this analysis showed that acute ischemic stroke patients may receive enhanced functional benefit from earlier endovascular treatment.     

An Analysis of Sponsors/Collaborators of 69,160 Drug Trials Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov

Background

Clinical trials have been criticized on various counts. Any attempt to improve how trials are conducted or reported requires—amongst other things—an understanding of the number, the nature and the location of those that sponsor them or collaborate on them. Here we sought to identify the nature and location of each sponsor/collaborator.

Methods and Findings

We examined the ''sponsor/collaborator'' field for the 69,160 drug trials that were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov over a 9-year period (2005–2014). Of the 12,823 unique sponsors, 56% had sponsored only one and 27% had sponsored 2–5 trials each. Just 18% were involved with six or more trials each, and we have (arbitrarily) labeled these organizations as ''more experienced'' in sponsoring/collaborating on trials. These 18% (2,266 sponsors/collaborators) were analyzed further: (a) 951 were corporate organizations and (b) 1,145 were non-corporates (including 31 individuals) with (c) 170 unclassified. Further, we identified the location of each organization in (a) and (b).

Conclusions

Clinical trials are an important part of a nation''s research endeavors, and ultimately contribute to the health of its people. Thus, understanding the clinical trial landscape—including the number and nature of sponsors, and how active they are—is important for every country. We believe that policy makers in particular should be interested in this study to understand the current situation, and to use the numbers as a baseline for the evolving landscape, to assess the impact of their strategies in future.     

Transparency of Outcome Reporting and Trial Registration of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Background

Confidence that randomized controlled trial (RCT) results accurately reflect intervention effectiveness depends on proper trial conduct and the accuracy and completeness of published trial reports. The Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (JCCP) is the primary trials journal amongst American Psychological Association (APA) journals. The objectives of this study were to review RCTs recently published in JCCP to evaluate (1) adequacy of primary outcome analysis definitions; (2) registration status; and, (3) among registered trials, adequacy of outcome registrations. Additionally, we compared results from JCCP to findings from a recent study of top psychosomatic and behavioral medicine journals.

Methods

Eligible RCTs were published in JCCP in 2013–2014. For each RCT, two investigators independently extracted data on (1) adequacy of outcome analysis definitions in the published report, (2) whether the RCT was registered prior to enrolling patients, and (3) adequacy of outcome registration.

Results

Of 70 RCTs reviewed, 12 (17.1%) adequately defined primary or secondary outcome analyses, whereas 58 (82.3%) had multiple primary outcome analyses without statistical adjustment or undefined outcome analyses. There were 39 (55.7%) registered trials. Only two trials registered prior to patient enrollment with a single primary outcome variable and time point of assessment. However, in one of the two trials, registered and published outcomes were discrepant. No studies were adequately registered as per Standard Protocol Items: Recommendation for Interventional Trials guidelines. Compared to psychosomatic and behavioral medicine journals, the proportion of published trials with adequate outcome analysis declarations was significantly lower in JCCP (17.1% versus 32.9%; p = 0.029). The proportion of registered trials in JCCP (55.7%) was comparable to behavioral medicine journals (52.6%; p = 0.709).

Conclusions

The quality of published outcome analysis definitions and trial registrations in JCCP is suboptimal. Greater attention to proper trial registration and outcome analysis definition in published reports is needed.     

Neurodevelopmental Outcomes of Extremely Preterm Infants Randomized to Stress Dose Hydrocortisone

Objective

To compare the effects of stress dose hydrocortisone therapy with placebo on survival without neurodevelopmental impairments in high-risk preterm infants.

Study Design

We recruited 64 extremely low birth weight (birth weight ≤1000g) infants between the ages of 10 and 21 postnatal days who were ventilator-dependent and at high-risk for bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Infants were randomized to a tapering 7-day course of stress dose hydrocortisone or saline placebo. The primary outcome at follow-up was a composite of death, cognitive or language delay, cerebral palsy, severe hearing loss, or bilateral blindness at a corrected age of 18–22 months. Secondary outcomes included continued use of respiratory therapies and somatic growth.

Results

Fifty-seven infants had adequate data for the primary outcome. Of the 28 infants randomized to hydrocortisone, 19 (68%) died or survived with impairment compared with 22 of the 29 infants (76%) assigned to placebo (relative risk: 0.83; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.14). The rates of death for those in the hydrocortisone and placebo groups were 31% and 41%, respectively (P = 0.42). Randomization to hydrocortisone also did not significantly affect the frequency of supplemental oxygen use, positive airway pressure support, or need for respiratory medications.

Conclusions

In high-risk extremely low birth weight infants, stress dose hydrocortisone therapy after 10 days of age had no statistically significant effect on the incidence of death or neurodevelopmental impairment at 18–22 months. These results may inform the design and conduct of future clinical trials.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00167544     

Meta-Analysis of a Complex Network of Non-Pharmacological Interventions: The Example of Femoral Neck Fracture

Background

Surgical interventions raise specific methodological issues in network meta-analysis (NMA). They are usually multi-component interventions resulting in complex networks of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with multiple groups and sparse connections.

Purpose

To illustrate the applicability of the NMA in a complex network of surgical interventions and to prioritize the available interventions according to a clinically relevant outcome.

Methods

We considered RCTs of treatments for femoral neck fracture in adults. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov up to November 2015. Two reviewers independently selected trials, extracted data and used the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias. A group of orthopedic surgeons grouped similar but not identical interventions under the same node. We synthesized the network using a Bayesian network meta-analysis model. We derived posterior odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs) for all possible pairwise comparisons. The primary outcome was all-cause revision surgery.

Results

Data from 27 trials were combined, for 4,186 participants (72% women, mean age 80 years, 95% displaced fractures). The median follow-up was 2 years. With hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a comparison, risk of surgical revision was significantly higher with the treatments unthreaded cervical osteosynthesis (OR 8.0 [95% CrI 3.6–15.5] and 5.9 [2.4–12.0], respectively), screw (9.4 [6.0–16.5] and 6.7 [3.9–13.6]) and plate (12.5 [5.8–23.8] and 7.8 [3.8–19.4]).

Conclusions

In older women with displaced femoral neck fractures, arthroplasty (HA and THA) is the most effective treatment in terms of risk of revision surgery.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO no. CRD42013004218.

Level of Evidence

Network Meta-Analysis, Level 1.     

Low Efficacy of Pegylated Interferon plus Ribavirin plus Nitazoxanide for HCV Genotype 4 and HIV Coinfection

Background

Nitazoxanide (NTZ) plus pegylated interferon and ribavirin (Peg-IFN/RBV) improved the sustained virological response (SVR) achieved with Peg-IFN/RBV in hepatitis C virus genotype 4 (HCV-4)-monoinfected patients. There are no data currently on the efficacy of Peg-IFN/RBV plus NTZ for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/HCV-4 coinfection. Therefore, the objectives of this clinical trial were to assess the efficacy and to evaluate the safety of Peg-IFN/RBV plus NTZ in HIV/HCV-4-coinfected patients.

Patients and Methods

This was an open-label, single arm, multicenter phase II pilot clinical trial ({"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01529073","term_id":"NCT01529073"}}NCT01529073) enrolling HIV-infected individuals with HCV-4 chronic infection, naïve to HCV therapy. Patients were treated with NTZ 500 mg bid for 4 weeks, followed by NTZ 500 mg bid plus Peg-IFN alpha-2b 1.5 μg/kg/week plus weight-adjusted RBV during 48 weeks. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat (ITT, missing = failure). A historical cohort of HIV/HCV-4-infected patients treated with Peg-IFN alpha-2b and RBV at the same area was used as control.

Results

Two (9.5%) of 21 patients included in the trial compared with 5 (21.7%) of 23 patients included in the historical cohort achieved SVR (SVR risk difference, -12.2%; 95% confidence interval, -33.2% to 8.8%; p = 0.416). Virological failure was due to lack of response in 13 (62%) individuals recruited in the trial. Two (9.5%) patients included in the trial and two (9.5%) individuals from the historical cohort discontinued permanently due to adverse events.

Conclusions

No increase in SVR was observed among HIV/HCV-4-coinfected patients receiving Peg-IFN/RBV plus NTZ compared with a historical cohort treated with Peg-IFN/RBV. Interruptions due to adverse events of Peg-IFN/RBV plus NTZ were similar to those of dual therapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01529073","term_id":"NCT01529073"}}NCT01529073     

Assessment of a Standardized Pre-Operative Telephone Checklist Designed to Avoid Late Cancellation of Ambulatory Surgery: The AMBUPROG Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives

To assess the impact of a standardized pre-operative telephone checklist on the rate of late cancellations of ambulatory surgery (AMBUPROG trial).

Design

Multicenter, two-arm, parallel-group, open-label randomized controlled trial.

Setting

11 university hospital ambulatory surgery units in Paris, France.

Participants

Patients scheduled for ambulatory surgery and able to be reached by telephone.

Intervention

A 7-item checklist designed to prevent late cancellation, available in five languages and two versions (for children and adults), was administered between 7 and 3 days before the planned date of surgery, by an automated phone system or a research assistant. The control group received standard management alone.

Main Outcome Measures

Rate of cancellation on the day of surgery or the day before.

Results

The study population comprised 3900 patients enrolled between November 2012 and September 2013: 1950 patients were randomized to the checklist arm and 1950 patients to the control arm. The checklist was administered to 68.8% of patients in the intervention arm, 1002 by the automated phone system and 340 by a research assistant. The rate of late cancellation did not differ significantly between the checklist and control arms (109 (5.6%) vs. 113 (5.8%), adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.91 [0.65–1.29], (p = 0.57)). Checklist administration revealed that 355 patients (28.0%) had not undergone tests ordered by the surgeon or anesthetist, and that 254 patients (20.0%) still had questions concerning the fasting state.

Conclusions

A standardized pre-operative telephone checklist did not avoid late cancellations of ambulatory surgery but enabled us to identify several frequent causes.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01732159","term_id":"NCT01732159"}}NCT01732159     

Randomized Controlled Trial of a Mobile Phone Intervention for Improving Adherence to Naltrexone for Alcohol Use Disorders

Background

Naltrexone is a front-line treatment for alcohol use disorders, but its efficacy is limited by poor medication adherence. This randomized controlled trial evaluated whether a mobile health intervention could improve naltrexone adherence.

Methods

Treatment-seeking participants with an alcohol use disorder (N = 76) were randomized to intervention and control conditions. All participants received naltrexone (50 mg/day) with a medication event monitoring system (MEMS) and a prepaid smartphone, and received a daily text message querying medication side effects, alcohol use, and craving. Those in the intervention arm received additional medication reminders and adherence assessment via text message.

Results

The primary outcome, proportion of participants with adequate adherence (defined as ≥80% of prescribed doses taken through Week 8), did not differ between groups in intent-to-treat analyses (p = .34). Mean adherence at study midpoint (Week 4) was 83% in the intervention condition and 77% in the control condition (p = .35). Survival analysis found that the intervention group sustained adequate adherence significantly longer (M = 19 days [95% CI = 0.0–44.0]) than those in the control group (M = 3 days [95% CI = 0.0–8.1]) during the first month of treatment (p = .04). Medication adherence did not predict drinking outcomes.

Conclusions

These results suggest that in the context of daily monitoring and assessment via cell phone, additional text message reminders do not further improve medication adherence. Although this initial trial does not provide support for the efficacy of text messaging to improve adherence to pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorders, additional trials with larger samples and alternate designs are warranted.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01349985