BACKGROUND: Causal graphs are an important tool for covariate selection but there is limited applied research on how best to create them. Here, we used data from the Coronary Drug Project trial to assess a range of approaches to directed acyclic graph (DAG) creation. We focused on the effect of adherence on mortality in the placebo arm, since the true causal effect is believed with a high degree of certainty.
METHODS: We created DAGs for the effect of placebo adherence on mortality using different approaches for identifying variables and links to include or exclude. For each DAG, we identified minimal adjustment sets of covariates for estimating our causal effect of interest and applied these to analyses of the Coronary Drug Project data.
RESULTS: When we used only baseline covariate values to estimate the cumulative effect of placebo adherence on mortality, all adjustment sets performed similarly. The specific choice of covariates had minimal effect on these (biased) point estimates, but including nonconfounding prognostic factors resulted in smaller variance estimates. When we additionally adjusted for time-varying covariates of adherence using inverse probability weighting, covariates identified from the DAG created by focusing on prognostic factors performed best.
CONCLUSIONS: Theoretical advice on covariate selection suggests that including prognostic factors that are not exposure predictors can reduce variance without increasing bias. In contrast, for exposure predictors that are not prognostic factors, inclusion may result in less bias control. Our results empirically confirm this advice. We recommend that hand-creating DAGs begin with the identification of all potential outcome prognostic factors.

UNASSIGNED: Medical ethics guidelines require of clinical trial investigators and sponsors to inform prospective trial participants of all known and potential risks associated with investigational medical products, and to obtain their free informed consent. These guidelines also require that clinical research be so designed as to minimize harms and maximize benefits.
UNASSIGNED: To examine Merck\'s scientific rationale for using a reactogenic aluminum-containing \"placebo\" in Gardasil HPV vaccine pre-licensure clinical trials.
UNASSIGNED: We examined the informed consent form and the recruitment brochure for the FUTURE II Gardasil vaccine trial conducted in Denmark; and we interviewed several FUTURE II trial participants and their treating physicians. We also reviewed regulatory documentation related to Gardasil vaccine approval process and the guidelines on evaluation of adjuvants used in human vaccines.
UNASSIGNED: It was found that the vaccine manufacturer Merck made several inaccurate statements to trial participants that compromised their right to informed consent. First, even though the study protocol listed safety testing as one of the study\'s primary objectives, the recruitment brochure emphasized that FUTURE II was not a safety study, and that the vaccine had already been proven safe. Second, the advertising material for the trial and the informed consent forms stated that the placebo was saline or an inactive substance, when, in fact, it contained Merck\'s proprietary highly reactogenic aluminum adjuvant which does not appear to have been properly evaluated for safety. Several trial participants experienced chronic disabling symptoms, including some randomized to the adjuvant \"placebo\" group.
UNASSIGNED: In our view, the administration of a reactive placebo in Gardasil clinical trials was without any possible benefit, needlessly exposed study subjects to risks, and was therefore a violation of medical ethics. The routine use of aluminum adjuvants as \"placebos\" in vaccine clinical trials is inappropriate as it hinders the discovery of vaccine-related safety signals.

Many studies that seek to cure HIV must ask participants to interrupt their antiretroviral treatment. In such circumstances, is it permissible to include a placebo group in the study? We explain why doing so is a scientific and an ethical necessity, and more benign than imagined.

BACKGROUND: Phase III trials often require large sample sizes, leading to high costs and delays in clinical decision-making. Group sequential designs can improve trial efficiency by allowing for early stopping for efficacy and/or futility and thus may decrease the sample size, trial duration and associated costs. Bayesian approaches may offer additional benefits by incorporating previous information into the analyses and using decision criteria that are more practically relevant than those used in frequentist approaches. Frequentist group sequential designs have often been used for phase III studies, but the use of Bayesian group sequential designs is less common. The aim of this work was to explore how Bayesian group sequential designs could be constructed for phase III trials conducted in emergency medicine.
METHODS: The PARAMEDIC2 trial was a phase III randomised controlled trial that compared the use of adrenaline to placebo in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients on 30-day survival rates. It used a frequentist group sequential design to allow early stopping for efficacy or harm. We constructed several alternative Bayesian group sequential designs and studied their operating characteristics via simulation. We then virtually re-executed the trial by applying the Bayesian designs to the PARAMEDIC2 data to demonstrate what might have happened if these designs had been used in practice.
RESULTS: We produced three alternative Bayesian group sequential designs, each of which had greater than 90% power to detect the target treatment effect. A Bayesian design which performed interim analyses every 500 patients recruited produced the lowest average sample size. Using the alternative designs, the PARAMEDIC2 trial could have declared adrenaline superior for 30-day survival with approximately 1500 fewer patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Using the PARAMEDIC2 trial as a case study, we demonstrated how Bayesian group sequential designs can be constructed for phase III emergency medicine trials. The Bayesian framework enabled us to obtain efficient designs using decision criteria based on the probability of benefit or harm. It also enabled us to incorporate information from previous studies on the treatment effect via the prior distributions. We recommend the wider use of Bayesian approaches in phase III clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: PARAMEDIC2 Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN73485024. Registered 13 March 2014, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN73485024.

As with other psychiatric disorders, development of drugs to treat binge-eating disorder (BED) has been hampered by high placebo response and dropout rates in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although not approved for use in BED, several RCTs have suggested that topiramate is efficacious for BED in obese individuals. Using data from a positive investigator-initiated RCT of topiramate in 61 obese individuals with BED, the objective of the present study is (i) to develop a quantitative disease-drug-trial framework to inform future BED clinical trial designs, and (ii) to determine the optimal topiramate dose to achieve therapeutic efficacy. Disease-drug-trial models were developed separately for the two efficacy measures, namely, longitudinal normalized weekly binge-eating episode frequency (BEF) and binge day frequency (BDF). Model building consisted of (i) developing a placebo effect model that describes response from the placebo group, (ii) adding a drug effect to the placebo model to describe dose-response relationships, and (iii) developing a parametric time to event model to characterize patient dropout patterns. The placebo effect on normalized BEF and BDF over time demonstrated a maximum decrease of ~ 57% by 5 weeks. Participants had a higher dropout probability if no weight loss occurred during the trial period. The identified dose-response relationship demonstrated a daily dose of 125 mg was needed to exhibit a marked reduction in weekly BEF. The developed comprehensive disease-drug-trial model will be utilized to simulate different clinical trial designs to increase the success for future BED drug development programs.

暂无摘要。

This study investigated whether providing sham feedback about sleep to individuals with insomnia influenced daytime symptom reports, sleep-related attentional bias and psychomotor vigilance. Sixty-three participants meeting DSM-5 criteria for insomnia disorder were recruited from the community. Following baseline assessments and actigraphy briefing, participants were randomised to receive next-day sham feedback on sleep quality (\"positive\" vs. \"negative\" sleep efficiency condition). Feedback was delivered at habitual rise-time using an integrated actigraphy-diary watch to simulate wearable device behaviour. Participants completed symptom reports immediately before receiving feedback, and at 12:00 and 15:00 hr, using the experience sampling method. Following this they returned to the laboratory in the evening to complete symptom reports and computerised tests of sleep-related attentional bias and basic psychomotor vigilance. Participants randomised to negative feedback (n = 32) evidenced impaired daytime function (decreased alert cognition [d = 0.79], increased sleepiness/fatigue [d = 0.55]) in the evening compared with those given positive feedback (n = 31). Within-day trajectories revealed that the positive-feedback group, relative to the negative-feedback group, displayed a significantly greater increase in positive mood and alert cognition (from rise-time to 12:00 hr), and significantly greater decrease in sleepiness/fatigue. There were no significant between-group differences on measures of sleep-related attentional bias [d = 0.20] or psychomotor vigilance [d = 0.12]. This controlled experiment shows that sham feedback about sleep biases appraisal of daytime symptoms, highlighting a pathway connecting sleep misperception with daytime features of insomnia. Findings have important implications for wearable devices that claim to measure \"objective\" sleep yet may provide inaccurate data relative to gold-standard measurement.

The use of placebos in randomised controlled trials is a subject of considerable ethical debate. In this paper we present a set of considerations to evaluate the ethics of placebo controlled trials that includes: social value of the study; need for a randomised controlled trial and placebo; standards of care; risks of harm due to administration of placebo and the harm benefit balance; clinical equipoise; and double standards. We illustrate the application of these considerations using a case study of a large ongoing multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomised trial to determine primaquine anti-relapse efficacy in vivax malaria.
There is an urgent need for primaquine anti-relapse studies in order to rationalise the management of a potentially fatal disease. An ethical justification for the use of the placebo arm is provided on the grounds that the actual current applied standard of care in most endemic places does not include primaquine. It has also been argued that there is clinical equipoise among the primaquine study arms and that the risk of harms of being in the placebo arm is the risk of having relapse, which is no more than not being included in the trial, and that there are no double standards.
Based on our set of considerations, we conclude that a placebo arm is not only justified but imperative in this study. We propose that similar considerations should be prospectively applied to other placebo controlled trials and observational control arms where no treatment is offered.

This article critically reviews HPV vaccine serious adverse events described in pre-licensure randomized trials and in post-marketing case series. HPV vaccine randomized trials were identified in PubMed. Safety data were extracted. Post-marketing case series describing HPV immunization adverse events were reviewed. Most HPV vaccine randomized trials did not use inert placebo in the control group. Two of the largest randomized trials found significantly more severe adverse events in the tested HPV vaccine arm of the study. Compared to 2871 women receiving aluminum placebo, the group of 2881 women injected with the bivalent HPV vaccine had more deaths on follow-up (14 vs. 3, p = 0.012). Compared to 7078 girls injected with the 4-valent HPV vaccine, 7071 girls receiving the 9-valent dose had more serious systemic adverse events (3.3 vs. 2.6%, p = 0.01). For the 9-valent dose, our calculated number needed to seriously harm is 140 (95% CI, 79–653) [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED] . The number needed to vaccinate is 1757 (95% CI, 131 to infinity). Practically, none of the serious adverse events occurring in any arm of both studies were judged to be vaccine-related. Pre-clinical trials, post-marketing case series, and the global drug adverse reaction database (VigiBase) describe similar post-HPV immunization symptom clusters. Two of the largest randomized HPV vaccine trials unveiled more severe adverse events in the tested HPV vaccine arm of the study. Nine-valent HPV vaccine has a worrisome number needed to vaccinate/number needed to harm quotient. Pre-clinical trials and post-marketing case series describe similar post-HPV immunization symptoms.

BACKGROUND: The relative scale has been used for decades in analysing binary data in epidemiology. In contrast, there has been a long tradition of carrying out meta-analyses of continuous outcomes on the absolute, original measurement, scale. The biological rationale for using the relative scale in the analysis of binary outcomes is that it adjusts for baseline variations; however, similar baseline variations can occur in continuous outcomes and relative effect scale may therefore be often useful also for continuous outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine whether the relative scale is more consistent with empirical data on treating the common cold than the absolute scale.
METHODS: Individual patient data was available for 2 randomized trials on zinc lozenges for the treatment of the common cold. Mossad (Ann Intern Med 125:81-8, 1996) found 4.0 days and 43% reduction, and Petrus (Curr Ther Res 59:595-607, 1998) found 1.77 days and 25% reduction, in the duration of colds. In both trials, variance in the placebo group was significantly greater than in the zinc lozenge group. The effect estimates were applied to the common cold distributions of the placebo groups, and the resulting distributions were compared with the actual zinc lozenge group distributions.
RESULTS: When the absolute effect estimates, 4.0 and 1.77 days, were applied to the placebo group common cold distributions, negative and zero (i.e., impossible) cold durations were predicted, and the high level variance remained. In contrast, when the relative effect estimates, 43 and 25%, were applied, impossible common cold durations were not predicted in the placebo groups, and the cold distributions became similar to those of the zinc lozenge groups.
CONCLUSIONS: For some continuous outcomes, such as the duration of illness and the duration of hospital stay, the relative scale leads to a more informative statistical analysis and more effective communication of the study findings. The transformation of continuous data to the relative scale is simple with a spreadsheet program, after which the relative scale data can be analysed using standard meta-analysis software. The option for the analysis of relative effects of continuous outcomes directly from the original data should be implemented in standard meta-analysis programs.