Assessing the use of observational methods and real-world data to emulate ongoing randomized controlled trials.
Clin Trials
; 20(6): 689-698, 2023 12.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-37589143
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS:
There has been growing interest in better understanding the potential of observational research methods in medical product evaluation and regulatory decision-making. Previously, we used linked claims and electronic health record data to emulate two ongoing randomized controlled trials, characterizing the populations and results of each randomized controlled trial prior to publication of its results. Here, our objective was to compare the populations and results from the emulated trials with those of the now-published randomized controlled trials.METHODS:
This study compared participants' demographic and clinical characteristics and study results between the emulated trials, which used structured data from OptumLabs Data Warehouse, and the published PRONOUNCE and GRADE trials. First, we examined the feasibility of implementing the baseline participant characteristics included in the published PRONOUNCE and GRADE trials' using real-world data and classified each variable as ascertainable, partially ascertainable, or not ascertainable. Second, we compared the emulated trials and published randomized controlled trials for baseline patient characteristics (concordance determined using standardized mean differences <0.20) and results of the primary and secondary endpoints (concordance determined by direction of effect estimates and statistical significance).RESULTS:
The PRONOUNCE trial enrolled 544 participants, and the emulated trial included 2226 propensity score-matched participants. In the PRONOUNCE trial publication, one of the 32 baseline participant characteristics was listed as an exclusion criterion on ClinicalTrials.gov but was ultimately not used. Among the remaining 31 characteristics, 9 (29.0%) were ascertainable, 11 (35.5%) were partially ascertainable, and 10 (32.2%) were not ascertainable using structured data from OptumLabs. For one additional variable, the PRONOUNCE trial did not provide sufficient detail to allow its ascertainment. Of the nine variables that were ascertainable, values in the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial were discordant for 6 (66.7%). The primary endpoint of time from randomization to the first major adverse cardiovascular event and secondary endpoints of nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke were concordant between the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial. The GRADE trial enrolled 5047 participants, and the emulated trial included 7540 participants. In the GRADE trial publication, 8 of 34 (23.5%) baseline participant characteristics were ascertainable, 14 (41.2%) were partially ascertainable, and 11 (32.4%) were not ascertainable using structured data from OptumLabs. For one variable, the GRADE trial did not provide sufficient detail to allow for ascertainment. Of the eight variables that were ascertainable, values in the emulated trial and published randomized controlled trial were discordant for 4 (50.0%). The primary endpoint of time to hemoglobin A1c ≥7.0% was mostly concordant between the emulated trial and the published randomized controlled trial.CONCLUSION:
Despite challenges, observational methods and real-world data can be leveraged in certain important situations for a more timely evaluation of drug effectiveness and safety in more diverse and representative patient populations.Palabras clave
Texto completo:
1
Colección:
01-internacional
Banco de datos:
MEDLINE
Asunto principal:
Proyectos de Investigación
/
Infarto del Miocardio
Tipo de estudio:
Clinical_trials
/
Prognostic_studies
Límite:
Humans
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Clin Trials
Asunto de la revista:
MEDICINA
/
TERAPEUTICA
Año:
2023
Tipo del documento:
Article
País de afiliación:
Estados Unidos