A randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of a two-week course of dexamethasone for adult patients with a symptomatic Chronic Subdural Haematoma (Dex-CSDH trial).

Background: Chronic subdural haematoma is a collection of 'old blood' and its breakdown products in the subdural space and predominantly affects older people. Surgical evacuation remains the mainstay in the management of symptomatic cases. Objective: The Dex-CSDH (DEXamethasone in Chronic SubDural Haematoma) randomised trial investigated the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone in patients with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma. Design: This was a parallel, superiority, multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Assigned treatment was administered in a double-blind fashion. Outcome assessors were also blinded to treatment allocation. Setting: Neurosurgical units in the UK. Participants: Eligible participants included adults (aged ≥ 18 years) admitted to a neurosurgical unit with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma confirmed on cranial imaging. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 allocation to a 2-week tapering course of dexamethasone or placebo alongside standard care. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the Modified Rankin Scale score at 6 months dichotomised to a favourable (score of 0-3) or an unfavourable (score of 4-6) outcome. Secondary outcomes included the Modified Rankin Scale score at discharge and 3 months; number of chronic subdural haematoma-related surgical interventions undertaken during the index and subsequent admissions; Barthel Index and EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level utility index score reported at discharge, 3 months and 6 months; Glasgow Coma Scale score reported at discharge and 6 months; mortality at 30 days and 6 months; length of stay; discharge destination; and adverse events. An economic evaluation was also undertaken, during which the net monetary benefit was estimated at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Results: A total of 748 patients were included after randomisation: 375 were assigned to dexamethasone and 373 were assigned to placebo. The mean age of the patients was 74 years and 94% underwent evacuation of their chronic subdural haematoma during the trial period. A total of 680 patients (91%) had 6-month primary outcome data available for analysis: 339 in the placebo arm and 341 in the dexamethasone arm. On a modified intention-to-treat analysis of the full study population, there was an absolute reduction in the proportion of favourable outcomes of 6.4% (95% confidence interval 11.4% to 1.4%; p = 0.01) in the dexamethasone arm compared with the control arm at 6 months. At 3 months, the between-group difference was also in favour of placebo (-8.2%, 95% confidence interval -13.3% to -3.1%). Serious adverse events occurred in 60 out of 375 (16.0%) in the dexamethasone arm and 24 out of 373 (6.4%) in the placebo arm. The net monetary benefit of dexamethasone compared with placebo was estimated to be -£97.19. Conclusions: This trial reports a higher rate of unfavourable outcomes at 6 months, and a higher rate of serious adverse events, in the dexamethasone arm than in the placebo arm. Dexamethasone was also not estimated to be cost-effective. Therefore, dexamethasone cannot be recommended for the treatment of chronic subdural haematoma in this population group. Future work and limitations: A total of 94% of individuals underwent surgery, meaning that this trial does not fully define the role of dexamethasone in conservatively managed haematomas, which is a potential area for future study. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN80782810. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/15/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 12. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Chronic subdural haematoma is one of the most common conditions managed in adult neurosurgery and mainly affects older people. It is an 'old' collection of blood and blood breakdown products found on the surface of the brain. Surgery to drain the liquid collection is effective, with most patients improving. Given that inflammation is involved in the disease process, a commonly used steroid, dexamethasone, has been used alongside surgery or instead of surgery since the 1970s. However, there is no consensus or high-quality studies confirming the effectiveness of dexamethasone for the treatment of chronic subdural haematoma. This study was designed to determine the effectiveness of adding dexamethasone to the normal treatment for patients with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma. The benefit of adding dexamethasone was measured using a disability score called the Modified Rankin Scale, which can be divided into favourable and unfavourable outcomes. This was assessed at 6 months after entry into the study. In total, 748 adults with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma treated in neurosurgical units in the UK participated. Each participant had an equal chance of receiving either dexamethasone or a placebo because they were assigned randomly. Neither the patients nor the investigators knew who received dexamethasone and who received placebo. Most patients in both groups had an operation to drain the haematoma and experienced significant functional improvement at 6 months compared with their initial admission to hospital. However, patients who received dexamethasone had a lower chance than patients who received placebo of favourable recovery at 6 months. Specifically, 84% of patients who received dexamethasone had recovered well at 6 months, compared with 90% of patients who received placebo. There were more complications in the group that received dexamethasone. This trial demonstrates that adding dexamethasone to standard treatment reduced the chance of a favourable outcome compared with standard treatment alone. Therefore, this study does not support the use of dexamethasone in treating patients with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma.

Trial of Dexamethasone for Chronic Subdural Hematoma.

BACKGROUND: Chronic subdural hematoma is a common neurologic disorder that is especially prevalent among older people. The effect of dexamethasone on outcomes in patients with chronic subdural hematoma has not been well studied. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial in the United Kingdom that enrolled adult patients with symptomatic chronic subdural hematoma. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a 2-week tapering course of oral dexamethasone, starting at 8 mg twice daily, or placebo. The decision to surgically evacuate the hematoma was made by the treating clinician. The primary outcome was a score of 0 to 3, representing a favorable outcome, on the modified Rankin scale at 6 months after randomization; scores range from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death). RESULTS: From August 2015 through November 2019, a total of 748 patients were included in the trial after randomization - 375 were assigned to the dexamethasone group and 373 to the placebo group. The mean age of the patients was 74 years, and 94% underwent surgery to evacuate their hematomas during the index admission; 60% in both groups had a score of 1 to 3 on the modified Rankin scale at admission. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis that excluded the patients who withdrew consent for participation in the trial or who were lost to follow-up, leaving a total of 680 patients, a favorable outcome was reported in 286 of 341 patients (83.9%) in the dexamethasone group and in 306 of 339 patients (90.3%) in the placebo group (difference, -6.4 percentage points [95% confidence interval, -11.4 to -1.4] in favor of the placebo group; P = 0.01). Among the patients with available data, repeat surgery for recurrence of the hematoma was performed in 6 of 349 patients (1.7%) in the dexamethasone group and in 25 of 350 patients (7.1%) in the placebo group. More adverse events occurred in the dexamethasone group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with symptomatic chronic subdural hematoma, most of whom had undergone surgery to remove their hematomas during the index admission, treatment with dexamethasone resulted in fewer favorable outcomes and more adverse events than placebo at 6 months, but fewer repeat operations were performed in the dexamethasone group. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme; Dex-CSDH ISRCTN number, ISRCTN80782810.).

Statistical analysis plan for the Dex-CSDH trial: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a 2-week course of dexamethasone for adult patients with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of chronic subdural haematoma (CSDH) is increasing. Although surgery remains the mainstay of management for symptomatic patients, uncertainty remains regarding the role of steroids. Hence, the Dex-CSDH trial was launched in the UK in 2015 aiming to determine whether, compared to placebo, dexamethasone can improve the 6-month functional outcome of patients with symptomatic CSDH by reducing the rate of surgical intervention and recurrence rate. METHODS AND DESIGN: Dex-CSDH is a multi-centre, pragmatic, parallel group, double-blind, randomised trial assessing the clinical utility of a 2-week course of dexamethasone following a CSDH. Seven hundred fifty patients were randomised to either dexamethasone or placebo. The primary outcome is the modified Rankin Scale at 6 months which is dichotomised to favourable (a score of 0-3) versus unfavourable (a score of 4-6). CONCLUSIONS: This paper and the accompanying additional material describe the statistical analysis plan for the trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN80782810. Registered on 7 November 2014. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN80782810. EudraCT, 2014-004948-35. Registered on 20 March 2015.

Knee Fix or Replace Trial (KFORT): a randomized controlled feasibility study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full-scale, appropriately powered, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing internal fracture fixation and distal femoral replacement (DFR) for distal femoral fractures in older patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven centres recruited patients into the study. Patients were eligible if they were greater than 65 years of age with a distal femoral fracture, and if the surgeon felt that they were suitable for either form of treatment. Outcome measures included the patients' willingness to participate, clinicians' willingness to recruit, rates of loss to follow-up, the ability to capture data, estimates of standard deviation to inform the sample size calculation, and the main determinants of cost. The primary clinical outcome measure was the EuroQol five-dimensional index (EQ-5D) at six months following injury. RESULTS: Of 36 patients who met the inclusion criteria, five declined to participate and eight were not recruited, leaving 23 patients to be randomized. One patient withdrew before surgery. Of the remaining patients, five (23%) withdrew during the follow-up period and six (26%) died. A 100% response rate was achieved for the EQ-5D at each follow-up point, excluding one missing datapoint at baseline. In the DFR group, the mean cost of the implant outweighed the mean cost of many other items, including theatre time, length of stay, and readmissions. For a powered RCT, a total sample size of 1400 would be required with 234 centres recruiting over three years. At six months, the EQ-5D utility index was lower in the DFR group. CONCLUSION: This study found that running a full-scale trial in this country would not be feasible. However, it may be feasible to undertake an international multicentre trial, and our findings provide some guidance about the power of such a study, the numbers required, and some challenges that should be anticipated and addressed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1408-1415.

Information needs and decision-making preferences of older women offered a choice between surgery and primary endocrine therapy for early breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To establish older women's (≥75 years) information preferences regarding 2 breast cancer treatment options: surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy versus primary endocrine therapy. To quantify women's preferences for the mode of information presentation and decision-making (DM) style. METHODS: This was a UK multicentre survey of women, ≥75 years, who had been offered a choice between PET and surgery at diagnosis of breast cancer. A questionnaire was developed including 2 validated scales of decision regret and DM preferences. RESULTS: Questionnaires were sent to 247 women, and 101 were returned (response rate 41%). The median age of participants was 82 (range 75 to 99), with 58 having had surgery and 37 having PET. Practical details about the impact, safety, and efficacy of treatment were of most interest to participants. Of least interest were cosmetic outcomes after surgery. Information provided verbally by doctors and nurses, supported by booklets, was preferred. There was little interest in technology-based sources of information. There was equal preference for a patient- or doctor-centred DM style and lower preference for a shared DM style. The majority (74%) experienced their preferred DM style. Levels of decision regret were low (15.73, scale 0-100). CONCLUSIONS: Women strongly preferred face to face information. Written formats were also helpful but not computer-based resources. Information that was found helpful to women in the DM process was identified. The study demonstrates many women achieved their preferred DM style, with a preference for involvement, and expressed low levels of decision regret.

Adaptive designs undertaken in clinical research: a review of registered clinical trials.

Adaptive designs have the potential to improve efficiency in the evaluation of new medical treatments in comparison to traditional fixed sample size designs. However, they are still not widely used in practice in clinical research. Little research has been conducted to investigate what adaptive designs are being undertaken. This review highlights the current state of registered adaptive designs and their characteristics. The review looked at phase II, II/III and III trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov from 29 February 2000 to 1 June 2014, supplemented with trials from the National Institute for Health Research register and known adaptive trials. A range of adaptive design search terms were applied to the trials extracted from each database. Characteristics of the adaptive designs were then recorded including funder, therapeutic area and type of adaptation. The results in the paper suggest that the use of adaptive designs has increased. They seem to be most often used in phase II trials and in oncology. In phase III trials, the most popular form of adaptation is the group sequential design. The review failed to capture all trials with adaptive designs, which suggests that the reporting of adaptive designs, such as in clinical trials registers, needs much improving. We recommend that clinical trial registers should contain sections dedicated to the type and scope of the adaptation and that the term 'adaptive design' should be included in the trial title or at least in the brief summary or design sections.