系统性红斑狼疮和狼疮肾炎疗法随机对照试验的脆弱性。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY Lupus Science & Medicine Pub Date : 2024-01-10 DOI:10.1136/lupus-2023-001068
Gabriel Figueroa-Parra, Michael S Putman, Cynthia S Crowson, Alí Duarte-García
{"title":"系统性红斑狼疮和狼疮肾炎疗法随机对照试验的脆弱性。","authors":"Gabriel Figueroa-Parra, Michael S Putman, Cynthia S Crowson, Alí Duarte-García","doi":"10.1136/lupus-2023-001068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to evaluate the robustness of phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for SLE and lupus nephritis (LN) using the fragility index (FI), the reverse FI (RFI) and the fragility quotient (FQ).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for phase III RCTs that included patients with active SLE or LN. Data on primary endpoints, total participants and the number of events for each arm were obtained. We calculated the FI score for RCTs with statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from event to non-event to make the study lose statistical significance), the RFI for RCTs without statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from non-event to event to make study gain statistical significance) and the FQ score for both (FI or RFI score divided by the sample size).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We evaluated 20 RCTs (16 SLE, four LN). The mean FI/RFI score was 13.6 (SD 6.6). There were nine RCTs with statistically significant results (seven SLE, two LN), and the mean FI score was 10.2 (SD 6.2). The lowest FI was for the ILLUMINATE-2 trial (FI=2), and the highest FI was for the BLISS-52 trial (FI=17).Twelve studies had non-statistically significant results (10 SLE, two LN) with a mean RFI score of 15.6 (SD 6.1). The lowest RFI was for the ILLUMINATE-1 trial (RFI=4), and the highest RFI was for the TULIP-1 trial (RFI=27). The lowest FQ scores were found in the ILLUMINATE trials and the highest in the Rituximab trials (EXPLORER and LUNAR), meaning that the last ones were the most robust results after accounting for sample size.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evidence of therapies for patients with SLE and LN is derived mostly from fragile RCTs. Clinicians and trialists must be aware of the fragility of these RCTs for clinical decision-making and designing trials for novel therapeutics.</p>","PeriodicalId":18126,"journal":{"name":"Lupus Science & Medicine","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10806519/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fragility of randomised controlled trials for systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis therapies.\",\"authors\":\"Gabriel Figueroa-Parra, Michael S Putman, Cynthia S Crowson, Alí Duarte-García\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/lupus-2023-001068\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to evaluate the robustness of phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for SLE and lupus nephritis (LN) using the fragility index (FI), the reverse FI (RFI) and the fragility quotient (FQ).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for phase III RCTs that included patients with active SLE or LN. Data on primary endpoints, total participants and the number of events for each arm were obtained. We calculated the FI score for RCTs with statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from event to non-event to make the study lose statistical significance), the RFI for RCTs without statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from non-event to event to make study gain statistical significance) and the FQ score for both (FI or RFI score divided by the sample size).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We evaluated 20 RCTs (16 SLE, four LN). The mean FI/RFI score was 13.6 (SD 6.6). There were nine RCTs with statistically significant results (seven SLE, two LN), and the mean FI score was 10.2 (SD 6.2). The lowest FI was for the ILLUMINATE-2 trial (FI=2), and the highest FI was for the BLISS-52 trial (FI=17).Twelve studies had non-statistically significant results (10 SLE, two LN) with a mean RFI score of 15.6 (SD 6.1). The lowest RFI was for the ILLUMINATE-1 trial (RFI=4), and the highest RFI was for the TULIP-1 trial (RFI=27). The lowest FQ scores were found in the ILLUMINATE trials and the highest in the Rituximab trials (EXPLORER and LUNAR), meaning that the last ones were the most robust results after accounting for sample size.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evidence of therapies for patients with SLE and LN is derived mostly from fragile RCTs. Clinicians and trialists must be aware of the fragility of these RCTs for clinical decision-making and designing trials for novel therapeutics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lupus Science & Medicine\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10806519/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lupus Science & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/lupus-2023-001068\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lupus Science & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/lupus-2023-001068","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的我们旨在使用脆性指数(FI)、反向脆性指数(RFI)和脆性商数(FQ)评估系统性红斑狼疮和狼疮性肾炎(LN)III 期随机对照试验(RCT)的稳健性:我们搜索了包含活动性系统性红斑狼疮或 LN 患者的 III 期 RCT。我们获得了各研究组的主要终点、总参与人数和事件数等数据。我们计算了有统计学意义的 RCT 的 FI 分值(从事件变为非事件使研究失去统计学意义所需的患者人数)、无统计学意义的 RCT 的 RFI 分值(从非事件变为事件使研究获得统计学意义所需的患者人数)以及两者的 FQ 分值(FI 或 RFI 分值除以样本量):我们评估了 20 项 RCT(16 项系统性红斑狼疮研究,4 项 LN 研究)。平均 FI/RFI 得分为 13.6(标清 6.6)。有 9 项研究得出了有统计学意义的结果(7 项系统性红斑狼疮,2 项结节性红斑狼疮),平均 FI 得分为 10.2(标准差为 6.2)。FI值最低的是ILLUMINATE-2试验(FI=2),FI值最高的是BLISS-52试验(FI=17)。12项研究的结果无统计学意义(10项系统性红斑狼疮,2项LN),平均RFI值为15.6(标实值6.1)。RFI最低的是ILLUMINATE-1试验(RFI=4),RFI最高的是TULIP-1试验(RFI=27)。FQ评分最低的是ILLUMINATE试验,最高的是利妥昔单抗试验(EXPLORER和LUNAR),这意味着在考虑样本量后,最后一项试验的结果最为可靠:结论:针对系统性红斑狼疮和LN患者的疗法证据主要来自于脆弱的RCT。临床医生和试验专家在临床决策和设计新疗法试验时必须意识到这些研究试验的脆弱性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fragility of randomised controlled trials for systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis therapies.

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the robustness of phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for SLE and lupus nephritis (LN) using the fragility index (FI), the reverse FI (RFI) and the fragility quotient (FQ).

Methods: We searched for phase III RCTs that included patients with active SLE or LN. Data on primary endpoints, total participants and the number of events for each arm were obtained. We calculated the FI score for RCTs with statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from event to non-event to make the study lose statistical significance), the RFI for RCTs without statistically significant results (number of patients required to change from non-event to event to make study gain statistical significance) and the FQ score for both (FI or RFI score divided by the sample size).

Results: We evaluated 20 RCTs (16 SLE, four LN). The mean FI/RFI score was 13.6 (SD 6.6). There were nine RCTs with statistically significant results (seven SLE, two LN), and the mean FI score was 10.2 (SD 6.2). The lowest FI was for the ILLUMINATE-2 trial (FI=2), and the highest FI was for the BLISS-52 trial (FI=17).Twelve studies had non-statistically significant results (10 SLE, two LN) with a mean RFI score of 15.6 (SD 6.1). The lowest RFI was for the ILLUMINATE-1 trial (RFI=4), and the highest RFI was for the TULIP-1 trial (RFI=27). The lowest FQ scores were found in the ILLUMINATE trials and the highest in the Rituximab trials (EXPLORER and LUNAR), meaning that the last ones were the most robust results after accounting for sample size.

Conclusions: The evidence of therapies for patients with SLE and LN is derived mostly from fragile RCTs. Clinicians and trialists must be aware of the fragility of these RCTs for clinical decision-making and designing trials for novel therapeutics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Lupus Science & Medicine
Lupus Science & Medicine RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
88
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Lupus Science & Medicine is a global, peer reviewed, open access online journal that provides a central point for publication of basic, clinical, translational, and epidemiological studies of all aspects of lupus and related diseases. It is the first lupus-specific open access journal in the world and was developed in response to the need for a barrier-free forum for publication of groundbreaking studies in lupus. The journal publishes research on lupus from fields including, but not limited to: rheumatology, dermatology, nephrology, immunology, pediatrics, cardiology, hepatology, pulmonology, obstetrics and gynecology, and psychiatry.
期刊最新文献
Altered structural and functional homotopic connectivity associated with cognitive changes in SLE. Evaluation and randomised controlled trial of home urinalysis testing in patients with SLE at elevated risk for developing lupus nephritis: a study protocol. Development of a predictive model for systemic lupus erythematosus incidence risk based on environmental exposure factors. Myocardial Performance Index to assess cardiac function in autoimmune connective tissue disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Role of intravenous immunoglobulins in the management of systemic lupus erythematosus: a single-centre experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1