ABSTRACT
The concept of "Less is more" has been gaining increasing awareness and acceptance in Critical Care. In 2017, we attempted to systematically answer the question "Can less be more in intensive care" with empirical data. We reviewed all the critical care randomized clinical trials (RCTs) between 1 January 2008 and 5 October 2016 in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). This article attempts to repeat the earlier exercise using data from 5 October 2016 to 31 December 2023. This analysis of critical care RCTs in the NEJM has shown three findings. Approximately three-quarter of RCTs in critical care in the NEJM between 2008 and 2023 failed to show benefit or harm. In the years 2008-2016, patients in the intervention cohort had a higher mortality compared to controls, but in the years 2016-2023, the difference in overall mortality in patients in the intervention and control arms was not statistically significant. Compared to the years 2008-2016, in the years from 2016 to 2023, the number of RCTs showing harm decreased and those showing benefit increased. How to cite this article: Kapadia F, Bharadwaj S, Sharma R. Is "Less be More" Still a Valid Concept in Intensive Care? A Review of Critical Care Randomized Clinical Trials from the New England Journal of Medicine. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(6):533-551.
ABSTRACT
Melanoma is the fifth most common cancer in the United States and accounts for the majority of all skin cancer-related deaths, making it the most lethal cutaneous malignancy. Systemic adjuvant therapy for stage IIB-IV melanoma is now approved for patients who have undergone surgical resection, given the appreciable risk of recurrence and mortality in this patient population. Despite the lower stage, high-risk stage II melanoma (stage IIB/IIC) can often exhibit an even more aggressive course when compared to stage IIIA/IIIB disease, thus justifying consideration of adjuvant therapy in these patients. In this review, we highlight the current standard of practice for the treatment of stage IIB/C melanoma, with a focus on adjuvant therapies supported by published landmark clinical trials, including anti-PD-1 therapy. Notably, adjuvant therapies approved thus far in this patient population have demonstrated an improvement in recurrence-free survival, while their impact on overall survival is pending. Finally, this review highlights currently ongoing trials and future directions for research and treatment possibilities for high-risk clinical stage II melanoma.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) remain the leading cause of mortality globally, and the scarcity of scientific evidence regarding the impact of ketogenic diets on CVD risk factors necessitates urgent attention and redress. OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis evaluates the impact of the ketogenic diet on CVD risk factors compared with control diets through randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: The study was registered in advance in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023491853). A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library to identify relevant RCTs. Fixed and random effects were employed to calculate the mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for changes in CVD risk factors pre- and postketogenic diet intervention. RESULTS: A total of 27 RCTs with 1278 participants were analyzed. The ketogenic diet intervention presented increase in total cholesterol (mean differences: 0.36 mmol/L; 95% CI: 0.15, 0.57; I2: 85.1%), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mean differences: 0.35 mmol/L; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.50; I2: 73.9%) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mean differences: 0.16 mmol/L; 95% CI: 0.09, 0.23; I2: 86.7%) concentrations. Reductions were observed in the triglyceride (mean differences: -0.20 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.29, -0.11; I2: 72.2%), blood glucose (mean differences: -0.18 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.33, -0.02; I2: 76.4%), blood insulin (mean differences: -8.32 pmol/L; 95% CI: -14.52, -2.12; I2: 81.5%), diastolic blood pressure (mean differences: -1.41 mmHg; 95% CI: -2.57, -0.26; I2: 49.1%), weight (mean differences: -2.59 kg; 95% CI: -3.90, -1.28; I2: 87.4%), and body mass index (mean differences: -1.59 kg/m2; 95% CI: -2.32, -0.86; I2: 84.5%) concentrations after implementing ketogenic diets. CONCLUSIONS: Although the ketogenic diet demonstrates benefits in terms of triglyceride, blood pressure, weight, and glycemic control, its impact on CVD risk factors, especially the elevated total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations, warrants a cautious approach.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Diet, Ketogenic , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Risk Factors , Triglycerides/bloodABSTRACT
Irritable bowel syndrome is a persistent disturbance of the function of the gastrointestinal tract with a prevalence of about 11.2% in the population at large. While the etiology of the disorder remains unclear, there is mounting evidence that the disturbance of the gut microbiota is at least one contributing factor. This insight resulted in clinical trials investigating the therapeutic effects of products containing probiotic microorganisms. Most studies with IBS patients have evaluated the therapeutic effects of mono- and multi-strain probiotics, but only a few studies have investigated the efficacy of synbiotics (combinations of probiotic bacteria and one or more prebiotic components). This review summarizes the results from eight randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials that investigated the efficacy of synbiotic preparations (three mono-strain and five multi-strain products) in adult IBS patients. While data remain sparse, some of the surveyed clinical trials have demonstrated interesting efficacy results in IBS patients. To allow a judgment of the role played by synbiotics in the treatment of IBS patients, more high-quality clinical trials are needed.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In the treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD), there is empirical support for both dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) and schema therapy (ST); these treatments have never been compared directly. This study examines whether either of them is more effective than the other in treating patients with BPD. METHODS: In this randomized, parallel-group, rater-blind clinical trial, outpatients aged between 18 and 65 years with a primary diagnosis of BPD were recruited in a tertiary outpatient treatment center (Lübeck, Germany). Participants were randomized to DBT or ST with one individual and one group session per week over 1.5 years. The primary outcome was the BPD symptom severity assessed with the mean score of the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index at 1-year naturalistic follow-up. RESULTS: Between November 26, 2014, and December 14, 2018, we enrolled 164 patients (mean age = 33.7 [SD = 10.61] years). Of these, 81 (49.4%) were treated with ST and 83 (50.6%) with DBT, overall, 130 (79.3%) were female. Intention-to-treat analysis with generalized linear mixed models did not show a significant difference at 1-year naturalistic follow-up between DBT and ST for the BPDSI total score (mean difference 3.32 [95% CI: -0.58-7.22], p = 0.094, d = -24 [-0.69; 0.20]) with lower scores for DBT. Pre-to-follow-up effect sizes were large in both groups (DBT: d = 2.45 [1.88-3.02], ST: d = 1.78 [1.26-2.29]). CONCLUSION: Patients in both treatment groups showed substantial improvements indicating that even severely affected patients with BPD and various comorbid disorders can be treated successfully with DBT and ST. An additional non-inferiority trial is needed to show if both treatments are equally effective. The trial was retrospectively registered on the German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00011534 without protocol changes.
Subject(s)
Borderline Personality Disorder , Dialectical Behavior Therapy , Humans , Borderline Personality Disorder/therapy , Female , Adult , Male , Dialectical Behavior Therapy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Middle Aged , Young Adult , Germany , Behavior Therapy/methods , AdolescentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Integrative oncology combines conventional and complementary, or integrative, therapies for a holistic treatment of cancer patients. Yoga is increasingly used as a complementary therapy for cancer patients, but there is no direct evidence for its effect on cancer pathophysiology like tumor response, or patient outcome like overall survival. SUMMARY: In this narrative review, we present in detail published studies from randomized clinical trials on complementary yoga therapy for cancer patients, including details about the biochemical mechanisms involved. Medicinal hatha yoga with breathing, postures, meditation, and relaxation enhances the quality of life of cancer patients by providing both psychological and physiological health benefits, highlighting the interconnectedness of mind and body. Yoga therapy reduces stress levels improving heart rate variability, leading to changes in hormonal regulation (e.g., cortisol), reduced oxidative stress, and improved immune function with reduced inflammation. Still, the biochemical effects of yoga on the cancer disease itself are unrevealed. KEY MESSAGES: More clinical and basic research is needed for further establishment of yoga as complementary therapy in oncology.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the underexplored prevalence of placebo-reported immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials. METHODS: We searched public databases for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving ICI versus placebo treatments in patients with malignancies. Study characteristics and irAEs occurrences were extracted for meta-analyses using a random-effects model. MAIN OUTCOMES: Proportions of patients reported to experience any grade and grade 3 to 5 placebo irAEs; the risk ratio (RR) of reporting 'false' irAEs in the experiment arm (defined as 'false-irAE ratio', calculated by dividing the proportion of patients documented with irAEs in the placebo arm by that in the experimental arm). RESULTS: 47 RCTs with 30,119 patients were analyzed. The pooled proportion of patients reported to experience any grade and grade 3 to 5 irAEs among placebo participants was 22.85 % (17.33 %-29.50 %) and 3.40 % (2.35 %-4.63 %), respectively. The pooled proportion of placebo-treated patients who experienced serious irAEs was 0.67 % (0.03 %-1.91 %). Treatment discontinuation and death due to placebo irAEs occurred in 0.69 % (<0.01 %-1.30 %) and 0.12 % (<0.01 %-0.40 %) of patients, respectively. The false-irAE ratio for any grade and grade 3 to 5 irAEs were 0.49 and 0.28. The false-irAE ratio was significantly higher in RCTs with control arms of placebo plus non-immunotherapy than in those with placebo alone (any grade: 0.57 vs. 0.32, P < 0.001; grade 3 to 5: 0.36 vs. 0.12, P = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Our analyses of placebo-treated participants in ICI RCTs document the common occurrence of placebo irAEs. These findings are important for interpreting irAE profiles, avoiding inappropriate therapeutic interventions.
Subject(s)
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Immunotherapy , Neoplasms , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/immunology , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effects , Immunotherapy/adverse effects , Immunotherapy/methods , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/etiology , Placebos/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This research investigates why a beneficial treatment effect reported at the first interim analysis (IA) may diminish at a subsequent analysis (SA). We examined three challenges in interpreting treatment effects from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) after the first positive IA: overestimation bias; non-proportional hazards; and heterogeneity in recruitment. We investigate how a penalized estimation method can address overestimation bias, and discuss additional factors to consider when interpreting positive IA results. METHODS: We identified oncology RCTs reporting positive results at the initial IA and a SA for event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS). We modeled: (1) the hazard ratio at IA (HRIA) versus its timing as measured by the information fraction (IF; i.e., events at IA versus total events sought); and (2), the ratio of HRIA to HRSA (rHR) versus the IF. This was repeated for HRIA adjusted for overestimation bias. Examples of the other two challenges were sought. RESULTS: Amongst 71 RCTs, HRIA were positively associated with the IF (slope: EFS 0.83, 95 % CI 0.44-1.22; OS 0.25, 95 % CI 0.10-0.41). HRIA tended to exaggerate HRSA, and more so the lower the IF (slope rHR versus IF: EFS 0.10, 95 % CI - 0.22 to 0.42; OS 0.26, 95 % CI 0.07-0.46). Adjusted HRIA did not exaggerate HRSA (slope rHR versus IF: EFS - 0.14, 95 % CI - 0.67 to 0.39; OS 0.02, 95 % CI - 0.26 to 0.30). Examples of two other challenges are shown. CONCLUSION: Overestimation bias, non-proportional hazards, and heterogeneity in recruitment and other important treatments should be considered when communicating estimates of treatment effects from positive IAs.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have assessed the efficacy and safety of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) as a therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the treatment processes and outcomes of these studies vary. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMT for treating UC by conducting a systematic meta-analysis. METHODS: The inclusion criteria involved reports of adult patients with UC treated with FMT, while studies that did not report clinical outcomes or that included patients with infection were excluded. Clinical remission (CR) and endoscopic remission (ER) were the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: We included nine studies retrieved from five electronic databases. The FMT group had better CR than the control group [relative risk (RR) = 1.53; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.19-1.94; P < 0.0008]. ER was statistically significantly different between the two groups (RR = 2.80; 95%CI: 1.93-4.05; P < 0.00001). Adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: FMT demonstrates favorable performance and safety; however, well-designed randomized clinical trials are still needed before the widespread use of FMT can be recommended. Furthermore, standardizing the FMT process is urgently needed for improved safety and efficacy.
ABSTRACT
Background: The antidiabetic potential of fenugreek has been highlighted in past literature, and various in-vitro and in-vivo studies have validated its glucose-lowering effects; however, very limited data are available on its effects on diabetic patients. Objective: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials that assessed patients who were administered fenugreek. Methods: The PRISMA guidelines (Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/MS9/A361) were followed when conducting this meta-analysis. PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and MEDLINE were searched from inception until June 2023, for randomized control trials that compared fenugreek with control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and reported the following outcomes of interest: fasting blood glucose, glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and postprandial glucose levels. The findings were presented as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and were pooled using a random effects model. Results: Fenugreek significantly (P<0.001) reduced the fasting blood sugar (FBS), HbA1c levels and postprandial glucose levels in diabetic patients when compared to the control. Conclusion: Among patients with type 2 DM, our comparisons demonstrated a reduction in FBS, HbA1c levels and postprandial glucose levels with the administration of fenugreek seed at 2-5 mg dose in powder form.
ABSTRACT
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the primary cause of death and disability worldwide. Although age-standardized CVD mortality rates decreased globally by 14.5% between 2006 and 2016, the burden of CVD remains disproportionately higher in low- and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries. Even though proven, effective approaches based on multiple-drug intake aimed at the prevention and treatment of CVD are currently available, poor adherence, early discontinuation of treatment, and suboptimal daily execution of the prescribed therapeutic regimes give rise to shortfalls in drug exposure, leading to high variability in the responses to the prescribed medications. Wald and Law, in their landmark paper published in BMJ 2003, hypothesized that the use of a fixed-dose combination of statins, ß-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and aspirin (classic Polypill composition) may increase adherence and decrease CVD by up to 80% when prescribed as primary prevention or in substitution of traditional protocols. Since then, many clinical trials have tested this hypothesis, with comparable results. This review aims to describe the available clinical trials performed to assess the impact of fixed-dose combinations on adherence, cost-effectiveness, and the risk factors critical to the onset of CVD.
ABSTRACT
When designing a randomized clinical trial to compare two treatments, the sample size required to have desired power with a specified type 1 error depends on the hypothesis testing procedure. With a binary endpoint (e.g., response), the trial results can be displayed in a 2 × 2 table. If one does the analysis conditional on the number of positive responses, then using Fisher's exact test has an actual type 1 error less than or equal to the specified nominal type 1 error. Alternatively, one can use one of many unconditional "exact" tests that also preserve the type 1 error and are less conservative than Fisher's exact test. In particular, the unconditional test of Boschloo is always at least as powerful as Fisher's exact test, leading to smaller required sample sizes for clinical trials. However, many statisticians have argued over the years that the conditional analysis with Fisher's exact test is the only appropriate procedure. Since having smaller clinical trials is an extremely important consideration, we review the general arguments given for the conditional analysis of a 2 × 2 table in the context of a randomized clinical trial. We find the arguments not relevant in this context, or, if relevant, not completely convincing, suggesting the sample-size advantage of the unconditional tests should lead to their recommended use. We also briefly suggest that since designers of clinical trials practically always have target null and alternative response rates, there is the possibility of using this information to improve the power of the unconditional tests.
Subject(s)
Endpoint Determination , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Design , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Sample Size , Endpoint Determination/methods , Models, Statistical , Data Interpretation, StatisticalABSTRACT
This review aims to evaluate the efficacy of any vitamin administration(s) in preventing and managing COVID-19 and/or long-COVID. Databases were searched up to May 2023 to identify randomized clinical trials comparing data on the effects of vitamin supplementation(s) versus placebo or standard of care on the two conditions of interest. Inverse-variance random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all-cause mortality between supplemented and non-supplemented individuals. Overall, 37 articles were included: two regarded COVID-19 and long-COVID prevention and 35 records the COVID-19 management. The effects of vitamin D in preventing COVID-19 and long-COVID were contrasting. Similarly, no conclusion could be drawn on the efficacy of multivitamins, vitamin A, and vitamin B in COVID-19 management. A few positive findings were reported in some vitamin C trials but results were inconsistent in most outcomes, excluding all-cause mortality (RR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72-0.97). Vitamin D results were mixed in most aspects, including mortality, in which benefits were observed in regular administrations only (RR = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49-0.91). Despite some benefits, results were mostly contradictory. Variety in recruitment and treatment protocols might explain this heterogeneity. Better-designed studies are needed to clarify these vitamins' potential effects against SARS-CoV-2.
Subject(s)
Ascorbic Acid , COVID-19 , Dietary Supplements , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Vitamin A , Vitamin D , Vitamins , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/mortality , Vitamins/therapeutic use , Vitamin D/therapeutic use , Vitamin D/administration & dosage , Ascorbic Acid/therapeutic use , Ascorbic Acid/administration & dosage , Vitamin A/therapeutic use , Vitamin A/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Vitamin B Complex/therapeutic useABSTRACT
The temptation to use prospective observational studies (POS) instead of conducting difficult trials (RCTs) has always existed, but with the advent of powerful computers and large databases, it can become almost irresistible. We examine the potential consequences, were this to occur, by comparing two hypothetical studies of a new treatment: one RCT, and one POS. The POS inevitably submits more patients to inferior research methodology. In RCTs, patients are clearly informed of the research context, and 1:1 randomized allocation between experimental and validated treatment balances risks for each patient. In POS, for each patient, the risks of receiving inferior treatment are impossible to estimate. The research context and the uncertainty are down-played, and patients and clinicians are at risk of becoming passive research subjects in studies performed from an outsider's view, which potentially has extraneous objectives, and is conducted without their explicit, autonomous, and voluntary involvement and consent.
Subject(s)
Big Data , Observational Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/ethics , Observational Studies as Topic/ethics , Research Design , Informed Consent/ethics , Prospective Studies , Philosophy, MedicalABSTRACT
When the primary endpoints in randomized clinical trials require long term follow-up or are costly to measure, it is often desirable to assess treatment effects on surrogate instead of clinical endpoints. Prior to adopting a surrogate endpoint for such purposes, the extent of its surrogacy on the primary endpoint must be assessed. There is a rich statistical literature on assessing surrogacy in the overall population, much of which is based on quantifying the proportion of treatment effect on the primary endpoint that is explained by the treatment effect on the surrogate endpoint. However, the surrogacy of an endpoint may vary across different patient subgroups according to baseline demographic characteristics, and limited methods are currently available to assess overall surrogacy in the presence of potential surrogacy heterogeneity. In this paper, we propose methods that incorporate covariates for baseline information, such as age, to improve overall surrogacy assessment. We use flexible semi-non-parametric modeling strategies to adjust for covariate effects and derive a robust estimate for the proportion of treatment effect of the covariate-adjusted surrogate endpoint. Simulation results suggest that the adjusted surrogate endpoint has greater proportion of treatment effect compared to the unadjusted surrogate endpoint. We apply the proposed method to data from a clinical trial of infliximab and assess the adequacy of the surrogate endpoint in the presence of age heterogeneity.