Deze pagina is automatisch vertaald en de nauwkeurigheid van de vertaling kan niet worden gegarandeerd. Raadpleeg de Engelse versie voor een brontekst.

Regression Discontinuity Design to Evaluate of Drotrecogin Alpha Effectiveness

21 juli 2016 bijgewerkt door: Allan J. Walkey, Boston Medical Center

Regression Discontinuity Designs to Evaluate Real-world Effectiveness: a Case Study of Drotrecogin Alpha

Many health care interventions and medications found to have benefits ("efficacy") in experimental, tightly-controlled, human research trials are later found to lack real-world health benefits ("effectiveness"). Inadequate surveillance of real-world clinical effectiveness may falsely reassure clinicians and those who monitor healthcare quality, propagating unrecognized ineffective or harmful treatments at high costs to patients and society. The failure to translate potential health benefits into realized gains, or to detect unexpected harms in healthcare delivery, stems from a lack of methods with which to robustly measure real-world (in)effectiveness. Current methods to detect changes in outcomes 'before and after' implementation may be biased by secular trends in healthcare practice and outcomes; other methods to compare outcomes for treated and untreated patients may be biased by unmeasured factors.

The current project aims to develop and demonstrate - as a proof-of-concept - the use of a quasi-experimental research method called 'regression discontinuity design (RDD)' in surveillance of real-world clinical effectiveness. RDD had previously found use in the evaluation of educational programs in which students scoring below a threshold were assigned an intervention. The US Department of Education considers RDD designs to have quality similar to randomized trials.

Studie Overzicht

Toestand

Voltooid

Conditie

Gedetailleerde beschrijving

Many health care interventions and medications found to have benefits ("efficacy") in experimental, tightly-controlled, human research trials are later found to lack real-world health benefits ("effectiveness"). Inadequate surveillance of real-world clinical effectiveness may falsely reassure clinicians and those who monitor healthcare quality, propagating unrecognized ineffective or harmful treatments at high costs to patients and society. The failure to translate potential health benefits into realized gains, or to detect unexpected harms in healthcare delivery, stems from a lack of methods with which to robustly measure real-world (in)effectiveness. Current methods to detect changes in outcomes 'before and after' implementation may be biased by secular trends in healthcare practice and outcomes; other methods to compare outcomes for treated and untreated patients may be biased by unmeasured factors.

The current project aims to develop and demonstrate - as a proof-of-concept - the use of a quasi-experimental research method called 'regression discontinuity design (RDD)' in surveillance of real-world clinical effectiveness. RDD had previously found use in the evaluation of educational programs in which students scoring below a threshold were assigned an intervention. The US Department of Education considers RDD designs to have quality similar to randomized trials. However, RDD has not been rigorously evaluated in the context of evaluating clinical effectiveness. RDD can be used whenever an intervention is given to patients scoring above a threshold on a continuous biomarker or risk score. This scenario often arises in clinical practice, in which thresholds are used to identify and treat 'high risk' patients. In RDD, outcomes are compared for patients just above and just below the threshold, who are similar, but receive different treatments.

The project will study the use of RDD in evaluating the real-world effectiveness of drotrecogin alpha, a medication that was recommended by the FDA to be given to critically ill patients with severe sepsis at high risk for mortality (APACHE score > 25). Drotrecogin alpha was shown to potentially have "effectiveness" using traditional methods of real-world research, but was eventually shown to not be clinically efficacious in subsequent large randomized trials. The present proposal is a 'proof-of-concept' study that will allow evaluation of effect estimates derived from RDD methods to those of gold standard, pooled randomized trial results. The demonstration of feasibility for a new research method, such as RDD, to evaluate real-world clinical effectiveness would be a major leap forward in the ability monitor for potential real world benefits and harms of new treatments.

Studietype

Observationeel

Inschrijving (Werkelijk)

12492

Contacten en locaties

In dit gedeelte vindt u de contactgegevens van degenen die het onderzoek uitvoeren en informatie over waar dit onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd.

Studie Locaties

    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, Verenigde Staten, 02118
        • Boston Medical Center

Deelname Criteria

Onderzoekers zoeken naar mensen die aan een bepaalde beschrijving voldoen, de zogenaamde geschiktheidscriteria. Enkele voorbeelden van deze criteria zijn iemands algemene gezondheidstoestand of eerdere behandelingen.

Geschiktheidscriteria

Leeftijden die in aanmerking komen voor studie

  • Kind
  • Volwassen
  • Oudere volwassene

Accepteert gezonde vrijwilligers

Nee

Geslachten die in aanmerking komen voor studie

Allemaal

Bemonsteringsmethode

Niet-waarschijnlijkheidssteekproef

Studie Bevolking

An International Observational Study Among Severe Sepsis Patients Treated in the Intensive Care Unit (PROGRESS severe sepsis registry).

The PROGRESS registry of severe sepsis cases is a unique resource that contains data linking APACHE scores, drotrecogin alpha administration, and hospital mortality outcomes, providing an opportunity to study RDD as a novel method of comparative effectiveness research, and compare results derived from RDD to prior studies using more traditional comparative effectiveness designs (i.e., propensity score adjustment).

Beschrijving

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Included in PROGRESS severe sepsis registry

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None

Studie plan

Dit gedeelte bevat details van het studieplan, inclusief hoe de studie is opgezet en wat de studie meet.

Hoe is de studie opgezet?

Ontwerpdetails

Wat meet het onderzoek?

Primaire uitkomstmaten

Uitkomstmaat
Maatregel Beschrijving
Tijdsspanne
Relative risk reduction for mortality
Tijdsspanne: Duration of hospitalization, on average approximately 14 days
The study will evaluate the change in the relationship between APACHE II scores and hospital mortality rate at the APACHE II threshold score of 25
Duration of hospitalization, on average approximately 14 days

Secundaire uitkomstmaten

Uitkomstmaat
Maatregel Beschrijving
Tijdsspanne
APACHE II scores at which drotrecogin alpha was used
Tijdsspanne: Baseline
Evaluation of drotrecogin alpha practice patterns at APACHE II score of 25
Baseline
Change in mortality risk over time
Tijdsspanne: 3 years
The study will assess interaction between year and relative risk for mortality associated with drotrecogin alpha
3 years

Medewerkers en onderzoekers

Hier vindt u mensen en organisaties die betrokken zijn bij dit onderzoek.

Publicaties en nuttige links

De persoon die verantwoordelijk is voor het invoeren van informatie over het onderzoek stelt deze publicaties vrijwillig ter beschikking. Dit kan gaan over alles wat met het onderzoek te maken heeft.

Studie record data

Deze datums volgen de voortgang van het onderzoeksdossier en de samenvatting van de ingediende resultaten bij ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieverslagen en gerapporteerde resultaten worden beoordeeld door de National Library of Medicine (NLM) om er zeker van te zijn dat ze voldoen aan specifieke kwaliteitscontrolenormen voordat ze op de openbare website worden geplaatst.

Bestudeer belangrijke data

Studie start

1 december 2002

Primaire voltooiing (Werkelijk)

1 december 2005

Studieregistratiedata

Eerst ingediend

15 juli 2016

Eerst ingediend dat voldeed aan de QC-criteria

21 juli 2016

Eerst geplaatst (Schatting)

26 juli 2016

Updates van studierecords

Laatste update geplaatst (Schatting)

26 juli 2016

Laatste update ingediend die voldeed aan QC-criteria

21 juli 2016

Laatst geverifieerd

1 juli 2016

Meer informatie

Termen gerelateerd aan deze studie

Aanvullende relevante MeSH-voorwaarden

Andere studie-ID-nummers

  • H-35010

Plan Individuele Deelnemersgegevens (IPD)

Bent u van plan om gegevens van individuele deelnemers (IPD) te delen?

NEE

Beschrijving IPD-plan

Individual participant data (IPD) is only available through consultation with the original PROGRESS registry study sponsor through https://www.clinicalstudydatarequest.com/

Deze informatie is zonder wijzigingen rechtstreeks van de website clinicaltrials.gov gehaald. Als u verzoeken heeft om uw onderzoeksgegevens te wijzigen, te verwijderen of bij te werken, neem dan contact op met register@clinicaltrials.gov. Zodra er een wijziging wordt doorgevoerd op clinicaltrials.gov, wordt deze ook automatisch bijgewerkt op onze website .

Abonneren