Reporting of analyses from randomized controlled trials with multiple arms: a systematic review

BMC Medicine

Philippe Ravaud¹  Isabelle Boutron²  Elodie Perrodeau³  Gabriel Baron³ 

[1] Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA;Centre de Médecine Fondée sur les Preuves (EHESP, HAS, INSERM, AP-HP), Paris, France;Université Paris Descartes, Faculté de Médecine, Paris, France

关键词: Reporting of analyses;    Multiple arms;    Randomized controlled trials;    Systematic review;   

Others  :  857125
DOI  :  10.1186/1741-7015-11-84

 received in 2012-12-03, accepted in 2013-03-05,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Multiple-arm randomized trials can be more complex in their design, data analysis, and result reporting than two-arm trials. We conducted a systematic review to assess the reporting of analyses in reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with multiple arms.

Methods

The literature in the MEDLINE database was searched for reports of RCTs with multiple arms published in 2009 in the core clinical journals. Two reviewers extracted data using a standardized extraction form.

Results

In total, 298 reports were identified. Descriptions of the baseline characteristics and outcomes per group were missing in 45 reports (15.1%) and 48 reports (16.1%), respectively. More than half of the articles (n = 171, 57.4%) reported that a planned global test comparison was used (that is, assessment of the global differences between all groups), but 67 (39.2%) of these 171 articles did not report details of the planned analysis. Of the 116 articles reporting a global comparison test, 12 (10.3%) did not report the analysis as planned. In all, 60% of publications (n = 180) described planned pairwise test comparisons (that is, assessment of the difference between two groups), but 20 of these 180 articles (11.1%) did not report the pairwise test comparisons. Of the 204 articles reporting pairwise test comparisons, the comparisons were not planned for 44 (21.6%) of them. Less than half the reports (n = 137; 46%) provided baseline and outcome data per arm and reported the analysis as planned.

Conclusions

Our findings highlight discrepancies between the planning and reporting of analyses in reports of multiple-arm trials.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Baron et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Cook RJ, Farewell VT: Multiplicity considerations in the design and analysis of clinical trials. J R Statistic Soc A 1996, 159(1):93-110.
• [2]Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products: Points to consider on multiplicity issued in clinical trials. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003640.pdf webcite
• [3]Freidlin B, Korn EL, Gray R, Martin A: Multi-arm clinical trials of new agents: some design considerations. Clin Cancer Res 2008, 14(14):4368-4371.
• [4]Jung SH, George SL: Between-arm comparisons in randomized Phase II trials. J Biopharm Stat 2009, 19(3):456-468.
• [5]Proschan MA: A multiple comparison procedure for three- and four-armed controlled clinical trials. Stat Med 1999, 18(7):787-798.
• [6]Schulz KF, Grimes DA: Multiplicity in randomised trials I: endpoints and treatments. Lancet 2005, 365(9470):1591-1595.
• [7]Chan AW, Altman DG: Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 2005, 365(9465):1159-1162.
• [8]Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products: Note for guidance on choice of control group in clinical trials. http://www.emea.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500002925.pdf webcite
• [9]Vermorken JB, Parmar MK, Brady MF, Eisenhauer EA, Hogberg T, Ozols RF, Rochon J, Rustin GJ, Sagae S, Verheijen RH: Clinical trials in ovarian carcinoma: study methodology. Ann Oncol 2005, 16(Suppl 8):viii20-viii29.
• [10]Schulz KF, Grimes DA: Multiplicity in randomised trials II: subgroup and interim analyses. Lancet 2005, 365(9471):1657-1661.
• [11]Higgins JPT, Green S (Eds): Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester: Wiley; 2008.
• [12]Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG: Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 2004, 291(20):2457-2465.
• [13]Juszczak E, Altman D, Chan AW: A review of the methodology and reporting of multi-arm, parallel group, randomised clinical trials (RCTs). 3rd Joint Meeting of the International Society for Clinical Biostatistics and Society for Clinical Trials. London (UK); 2003.
• [14]Moher D, Dulberg CS, Wells GA: Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994, 272(2):122-124.
• [15]Charles P, Giraudeau B, Dechartres A, Baron G, Ravaud P: Reporting of sample size calculation in randomised controlled trials: review. BMJ 2009, 338:b1732.
• [16]Boissel JP: How to deal with multiple treatment or dose groups in randomized clinical trials? Another approach. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2007, 21(2):155-156.
• [17]Hothorn LA: How to deal with multiple treatment or dose groups in randomized clinical trials? Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2007, 21(2):137-154.
• [18]Proschan MA, Waclawiw MA: Practical guidelines for multiplicity adjustment in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 2000, 21(6):527-539.
• [19]Chan AW, Upshur R, Singh JA, Ghersi D, Chapuis F, Altman DG: Research protocols: waiving confidentiality for the greater good. BMJ 2006, 332(7549):1086-1089.
• [20]Hill CL, LaValley MP, Felson DT: Discrepancy between published report and actual conduct of randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2002, 55(8):783-786.
• [21]Soares HP, Daniels S, Kumar A, Clarke M, Scott C, Swann S, Djulbegovic B: Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. BMJ 2004, 328(7430):22-24.
• [22]Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG: CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2004, 328(7441):702-708.
• [23]Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG: CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010, 340:c869.