Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism · 2004
High-dose versus low-dose D-penicillamine in early diffuse systemic sclerosis trial: lessons learned.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Clements Philip J, Seibold James R, Furst Daniel E, Mayes Maureen, White Barbara, Wigley Fredrick, Weisman Michael D, Barr Water, Moreland Larry, Medsger Thomas A, Steen Virginia, Martin Richard W, Collier David, Weinstein Arthur, Lally Edward, Varga John, Weiner Steven R, Andrews Brian, Abeles Micha, Wong Weng Kee
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To review important findings, or lessons, that were learned about measures of response, design, conduct, and analysis of a randomized, controlled trial (RCT), even though the trial failed to demonstrate efficacy of d-penicillamine.
METHODS: One hundred thirty-four patients with early (< or =18 months), diffuse systemic sclerosis (SSc) were entered into an RCT (high-dose [822 mg daily] vs low-dose [120 mg every other day] D-penicillamine) and were followed up regularly for up to 4 years. Because analysis failed to show efficacy for D-penicillamine in early diffuse SSc, all data were pooled for additional secondary analyses.
RESULTS: This RCT showed that trials of potential disease-modifying interventions can be completed in SSc using the American College of Rheumatology guidelines. This RCT used an active control. After analysis, we were not able to tell whether either dose was effective or ineffective. That experience argues in favor of using placebo controls until such time as an active control can be found that truly modifies the disease. Skin score and the disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) were valid predictors of outcome. Along with the physician global assessment, they also were valid measures of response.
CONCLUSIONS: Even in studies that are therapeutically "negative," careful evaluation of the data can examine other hypotheses and thereby provide important insights into other aspects of trial design, outcome measures, patient function, and trial conduct.
METHODS: One hundred thirty-four patients with early (< or =18 months), diffuse systemic sclerosis (SSc) were entered into an RCT (high-dose [822 mg daily] vs low-dose [120 mg every other day] D-penicillamine) and were followed up regularly for up to 4 years. Because analysis failed to show efficacy for D-penicillamine in early diffuse SSc, all data were pooled for additional secondary analyses.
RESULTS: This RCT showed that trials of potential disease-modifying interventions can be completed in SSc using the American College of Rheumatology guidelines. This RCT used an active control. After analysis, we were not able to tell whether either dose was effective or ineffective. That experience argues in favor of using placebo controls until such time as an active control can be found that truly modifies the disease. Skin score and the disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ-DI) were valid predictors of outcome. Along with the physician global assessment, they also were valid measures of response.
CONCLUSIONS: Even in studies that are therapeutically "negative," careful evaluation of the data can examine other hypotheses and thereby provide important insights into other aspects of trial design, outcome measures, patient function, and trial conduct.