Denne siden ble automatisk oversatt og nøyaktigheten av oversettelsen er ikke garantert. Vennligst referer til engelsk versjon for en kildetekst.

Regression Discontinuity Design to Evaluate of Drotrecogin Alpha Effectiveness

21. juli 2016 oppdatert av: 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.

Studieoversikt

Status

Fullført

Forhold

Detaljert beskrivelse

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

Observasjonsmessig

Registrering (Faktiske)

12492

Kontakter og plasseringer

Denne delen inneholder kontaktinformasjon for de som utfører studien, og informasjon om hvor denne studien blir utført.

Studiesteder

    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, Forente stater, 02118
        • Boston Medical Center

Deltakelseskriterier

Forskere ser etter personer som passer til en bestemt beskrivelse, kalt kvalifikasjonskriterier. Noen eksempler på disse kriteriene er en persons generelle helsetilstand eller tidligere behandlinger.

Kvalifikasjonskriterier

Alder som er kvalifisert for studier

  • Barn
  • Voksen
  • Eldre voksen

Tar imot friske frivillige

Nei

Kjønn som er kvalifisert for studier

Alle

Prøvetakingsmetode

Ikke-sannsynlighetsprøve

Studiepopulasjon

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).

Beskrivelse

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Included in PROGRESS severe sepsis registry

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None

Studieplan

Denne delen gir detaljer om studieplanen, inkludert hvordan studien er utformet og hva studien måler.

Hvordan er studiet utformet?

Designdetaljer

Hva måler studien?

Primære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Relative risk reduction for mortality
Tidsramme: 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

Sekundære resultatmål

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

Samarbeidspartnere og etterforskere

Det er her du vil finne personer og organisasjoner som er involvert i denne studien.

Publikasjoner og nyttige lenker

Den som er ansvarlig for å legge inn informasjon om studien leverer frivillig disse publikasjonene. Disse kan handle om alt relatert til studiet.

Studierekorddatoer

Disse datoene sporer fremdriften for innsending av studieposter og sammendragsresultater til ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieposter og rapporterte resultater gjennomgås av National Library of Medicine (NLM) for å sikre at de oppfyller spesifikke kvalitetskontrollstandarder før de legges ut på det offentlige nettstedet.

Studer hoveddatoer

Studiestart

1. desember 2002

Primær fullføring (Faktiske)

1. desember 2005

Datoer for studieregistrering

Først innsendt

15. juli 2016

Først innsendt som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

21. juli 2016

Først lagt ut (Anslag)

26. juli 2016

Oppdateringer av studieposter

Sist oppdatering lagt ut (Anslag)

26. juli 2016

Siste oppdatering sendt inn som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

21. juli 2016

Sist bekreftet

1. juli 2016

Mer informasjon

Begreper knyttet til denne studien

Ytterligere relevante MeSH-vilkår

Andre studie-ID-numre

  • H-35010

Plan for individuelle deltakerdata (IPD)

Planlegger du å dele individuelle deltakerdata (IPD)?

NEI

IPD-planbeskrivelse

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

Denne informasjonen ble hentet direkte fra nettstedet clinicaltrials.gov uten noen endringer. Hvis du har noen forespørsler om å endre, fjerne eller oppdatere studiedetaljene dine, vennligst kontakt register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en endring er implementert på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også bli oppdatert automatisk på nettstedet vårt. .

Abonnere