Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical trial results in context: comparison of baseline characteristics and outcomes of 38,510 RECOVERY trial participants versus a reference population of 346,271 people hospitalised with COVID-19 in England.
Pessoa-Amorim, Guilherme; Goldacre, Raphael; Crichton, Charles; Stevens, Will; Nunn, Michelle; King, Andy; Murray, Dave; Welsh, Richard; Pinches, Heather; Rees, Andrew; Morris, Eva J A; Landray, Martin J; Haynes, Richard; Horby, Peter; Wallendszus, Karl; Peto, Leon; Campbell, Mark; Harper, Charlie; Mafham, Marion.
Afiliación
  • Pessoa-Amorim G; Clinical Trial Service Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX37LF, UK. guilherme.pessoa-amorim@ndph.ox.ac.uk.
  • Goldacre R; Medical Research Council Population Health Research Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. guilherme.pessoa-amorim@ndph.ox.ac.uk.
  • Crichton C; Big Data Institute, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Stevens W; Big Data Institute, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Nunn M; Clinical Trial Service Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX37LF, UK.
  • King A; Medical Research Council Population Health Research Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Murray D; Clinical Trial Service Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX37LF, UK.
  • Welsh R; Medical Research Council Population Health Research Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Pinches H; National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Rees A; National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Morris EJA; National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Landray MJ; NHS DigiTrials, Leeds, UK.
  • Haynes R; NHS DigiTrials, Leeds, UK.
  • Horby P; Big Data Institute, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Wallendszus K; NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
  • Peto L; Clinical Trial Service Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX37LF, UK.
  • Campbell M; Medical Research Council Population Health Research Unit, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Harper C; Big Data Institute, Oxford Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
  • Mafham M; NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Trials ; 25(1): 429, 2024 Jun 29.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38951929
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Randomised trials are essential to reliably assess medical interventions. Nevertheless, interpretation of such studies, particularly when considering absolute effects, is enhanced by understanding how the trial population may differ from the populations it aims to represent.

METHODS:

We compared baseline characteristics and mortality of RECOVERY participants recruited in England (n = 38,510) with a reference population hospitalised with COVID-19 in England (n = 346,271) from March 2020 to November 2021. We used linked hospitalisation and mortality data for both cohorts to extract demographics, comorbidity/frailty scores, and crude and age- and sex-adjusted 28-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS:

Demographics of RECOVERY participants were broadly similar to the reference population, but RECOVERY participants were younger (mean age [standard deviation] RECOVERY 62.6 [15.3] vs reference 65.7 [18.5] years) and less frequently female (37% vs 45%). Comorbidity and frailty scores were lower in RECOVERY, but differences were attenuated after age stratification. Age- and sex-adjusted 28-day mortality declined over time but was similar between cohorts across the study period (RECOVERY 23.7% [95% confidence interval 23.3-24.1%]; vs reference 24.8% [24.6-25.0%]), except during the first pandemic wave in the UK (March-May 2020) when adjusted mortality was lower in RECOVERY.

CONCLUSIONS:

Adjusted 28-day mortality in RECOVERY was similar to a nationwide reference population of patients admitted with COVID-19 in England during the same period but varied substantially over time in both cohorts. Therefore, the absolute effect estimates from RECOVERY were broadly applicable to the target population at the time but should be interpreted in the light of current mortality estimates. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN50189673- Feb. 04, 2020, NCT04381936- May 11, 2020.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: COVID-19 / Hospitalización Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Trials Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: COVID-19 / Hospitalización Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Trials Asunto de la revista: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Reino Unido