Intracluster correlation coefficients in osteoarthritis cluster randomized trials: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: The design, analysis, and interpretation of cluster randomized clinical trials (RCTs) require accounting for potential correlation of observations on individuals within the same cluster. Reporting of observed intracluster correlation coefficients (ICCs) in cluster RCTs, as recommended by Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), facilitates sample size calculation of future cluster RCTs and understanding of the trial statistical power. Our objective was to summarize observed ICCs in osteoarthritis (OA) cluster RCTs. DESIGN: Systematic review of knee/hip OA cluster RCTs. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for trials published from 2012, when CONSORT cluster RCTs extension was published, to September 2022. We calculated the proportion of cluster RCTs that reported observed ICCs. Of those that did, we extracted observed ICCs. PROSPERO: CRD42022365660. RESULTS: We screened 1121 references and included 20 cluster RCTs. Only 5 trials (25%) reported the observed ICC for at least one outcome variable. ICC values for pain outcomes were: 0, 0.01, 0.18; for physical function outcomes were: 0, 0.06, 0.13 (knee)/0.27 (hip); Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) total: 0.02, 0.02; symptoms of anxiety/depression: 0.22; disability: 0; and global change: 0. One out of four (25%) trials reported an ICC that was larger than the ICC used for sample size calculation and thus was underpowered. CONCLUSIONS: Despite CONSORT statement recommendations for reporting cluster RCTs, few OA trials reported the observed ICC. Given the importance of the ICC to interpretation of trial results and future trial design, this reporting gap warrants attention.

Visual Analogue Scale has higher assay sensitivity than WOMAC pain in detecting between-group differences in treatment effects: a meta-epidemiological study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare assay sensitivity of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for global osteoarthritis pain and the Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) pain subscale, and the associated between-trial heterogeneity in effect sizes (ES). DESIGN: We included trials with placebo, sham or non-intervention control that included at least 100 patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis per arm, reporting both VAS and WOMAC pain scores. ES were calculated as between-group difference in means divided by the pooled standard deviation and compared using a paired t-test. ES and τ2 as a measure of between-trial heterogeneity were combined using random-effects meta-regression with robust variance estimation to account for the correlation of data within trials and meta-analyses. RESULTS: Twenty-eight trials with 44 randomized comparisons were included. In 28 comparisons (64%), ES from VAS favoured the intervention more than those from WOMAC pain (P = 0.003). Twenty-six p-values (59%) were smaller according to VAS (P = 0.008). The 44 comparisons contributed to 12 meta-analyses. Eleven meta-analyses (92%) showed larger benefits of interventions according to VAS, with a combined overall difference in ES of -0.08 (95% CI -0.14 to -0.02). τ2 was similar for VAS and WOMAC pain (difference in τ2, -0.003, 95% CI -0.009 to 0.004). CONCLUSION: The VAS for global pain had slightly higher assay sensitivity at trial and meta-analysis levels than the WOMAC pain subscale without relevant increase in between-trial heterogeneity.

Viscosupplementation for knee osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of viscosupplementation for pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases from inception to 11 September 2021. Unpublished trials were identified from the grey literature and trial registries. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Randomised trials comparing viscosupplementation with placebo or no intervention for knee osteoarthritis treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The prespecified primary outcome was pain intensity. Secondary outcomes were function and serious adverse events. Pain and function were analysed as standardised mean differences (SMDs). The prespecified minimal clinically important between group difference was -0.37 SMD. Serious adverse events were analysed as relative risks. METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias of trials using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The predefined main analysis was based only on large, placebo controlled trials with ≥100 participants per group. Summary results were obtained through a random effects meta-analysis model. Cumulative meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis under a random effects model were also performed. RESULTS: 169 trials provided data on 21 163 randomised participants. Evidence of small study effects and publication biases was observed for pain and function (Egger's tests with P<0.001 and asymmetric funnel plots). Twenty four large, placebo controlled trials (8997 randomised participants) included in the main analysis of pain indicated that viscosupplementation was associated with a small reduction in pain intensity compared with placebo (SMD -0.08, 95% confidence interval -0.15 to -0.02), with the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval excluding the minimal clinically important between group difference. This effect corresponds to a difference in pain scores of -2.0 mm (95% confidence interval -3.8 to -0.5 mm) on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Trial sequential analysis for pain indicated that since 2009 there has been conclusive evidence of clinical equivalence between viscosupplementation and placebo. Similar conclusions were obtained for function. Based on 15 large, placebo controlled trials on 6462 randomised participants, viscosupplementation was associated with a statistically significant higher risk of serious adverse events than placebo (relative risk 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.98). CONCLUSION: Strong conclusive evidence indicates that viscosupplementation leads to a small reduction in knee osteoarthritis pain compared with placebo, but the difference is less than the minimal clinically important between group difference. Strong conclusive evidence indicates that viscosupplementation is also associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events compared with placebo. The findings do not support broad use of viscosupplementation for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021236894.

Medications for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the most effective treatments of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Our objective was to compare effects of medications for PAH. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception to December 2021. We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis on all included trials. We rated the certainty of the evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: We included 53 randomised controlled trials with 10 670 patients. Combination therapy with endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA) plus phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5i) reduced clinical worsening (120.7 fewer events per 1000, 95% CI 136.8-93.4 fewer; high certainty) and was superior to either ERA or PDE5i alone, both of which reduced clinical worsening, as did riociguat monotherapy (all high certainty). PDE5i (24.9 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% CI 35.2 fewer to 2.1 more); intravenous/subcutaneous prostanoids (18.3 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% CI 28.6 fewer deaths to 0) and riociguat (29.1 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% CI 38.6 fewer to 8.7 more) probably reduce mortality as compared to placebo (all moderate certainty). Combination therapy with ERA+PDE5i (49.9 m, 95% CI 25.9-73.8 m) and riociguat (49.5 m, 95% CI 17.3-81.7 m) probably increase 6-min walk distance as compared to placebo (moderate certainty). CONCLUSION: Current PAH treatments improve clinically important outcomes, although the degree and certainty of benefit vary between treatments.

A Systematic Map of Non-Clinical Evidence Syntheses Published Globally on COVID-19.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Evidence syntheses perform rigorous investigations of the primary literature and they have played a vital role in generating evidence-based recommendations for governments worldwide during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, there has not yet been an attempt to organize them by topic and other characteristics. This study performed a systematic mapping exercise of non-clinical evidence syntheses pertaining to Covid-19. METHODS: This study conducted a systematic search on December 5, 2020 across 10 databases and servers: CINAHL (EBSCO Information Services, Ipswich, Massachusetts, United States), Embase (Elsevier, Aalborg, Denmark), Global Health (EBSCO Information Services, Ipswich, Massachusetts, United States), Healthstar (NICHSR and AHA, Bethesda, United States), MEDLINE (NLM, Bethesda, United States), PsychINFO (APA, Washington, DC, United States), Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics, London, UK), Research Square (Research Square, Durham, North Carolina), MEDRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York, United States), and PROSPERO (NIHR, York, United Kingdom). Only full evidence syntheses published in a peer-reviewed journal or preprint server were included. RESULTS: This study classified all evidence syntheses in the following topics: health service delivery (n = 280), prevention and behavior (n = 201), mental health (n = 140), social epidemiology (n = 31), economy (n = 22), and environment (n = 19). This study provides a comprehensive resource of all evidence syntheses categorized according to topic. CONCLUSIONS: This study proposes the following research priorities: governance, the impact of Covid-19 on different populations, the effectiveness of prevention and control methods across contexts, mental health, and vaccine hesitancy.

Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors, All-Cause Mortality, and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Bayesian Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.

Background This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in reducing the incidence of mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes. Methods and Results We conducted a Bayesian meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors with placebo. We used meta-regression to examine the association between treatment effects and control group event rates as measures of cardiovascular baseline risk. Fifty-three randomized controlled trials were included in our synthesis. Empagliflozin, canagliflozin, and dapagliflozin reduced the incidence of all-cause mortality (empagliflozin: rate ratio [RR], 0.79; 95% credibility interval [CrI], 0.63-0.97; canagliflozin: RR, 0.86; 95% CrI, 0.69-1.05; dapagliflozin: RR, 0.86; 95% CrI, 0.72-1.01) and cardiovascular mortality (empagliflozin: RR, 0.78; 95% CrI, 0.61-1.00; canagliflozin: RR, 0.83; 95% CrI, 0.63-1.05; dapagliflozin: RR, 0.88; 95% CrI, 0.71-1.08), with a 90.1% to 98.7% probability for the true RR to be <1.00 for both outcomes. There was little evidence for ertugliflozin and sotagliflozin versus placebo for reducing all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. There was no association between treatment effects for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and the control group event rates. There was evidence for a reduction in the incidence of heart failure for empagliflozin, canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, and ertugliflozin versus placebo (probability RR <1.00 of ≥99.3%) and weaker, albeit positive, evidence for acute myocardial infarction for the first 3 agents (probability RR <1.00 of 89.0%-95.2%). There was little evidence of any agent except canagliflozin for reducing the incidence of stroke. Conclusions Empagliflozin, canagliflozin, and dapagliflozin reduced the incidence of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality versus placebo. Treatment effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors versus placebo do not vary by baseline risk.

Effectiveness and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioid treatment for knee and hip osteoarthritis: network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of different preparations and doses of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and paracetamol for knee and hip osteoarthritis pain and physical function to enable effective and safe use of these drugs at their lowest possible dose. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, Embase, regulatory agency websites, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 28 June 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised trials published in English with ≥100 patients per group that evaluated NSAIDs, opioids, or paracetamol (acetaminophen) to treat osteoarthritis. OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prespecified primary outcome was pain. Physical function and safety outcomes were also assessed. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted outcomes data and evaluated the risk of bias of included trials. Bayesian random effects models were used for network meta-analysis of all analyses. Effect estimates are comparisons between active treatments and oral placebo. RESULTS: 192 trials comprising 102 829 participants examined 90 different active preparations or doses (68 for NSAIDs, 19 for opioids, and three for paracetamol). Five oral preparations (diclofenac 150 mg/day, etoricoxib 60 and 90 mg/day, and rofecoxib 25 and 50 mg/day) had ≥99% probability of more pronounced treatment effects than the minimal clinically relevant reduction in pain. Topical diclofenac (70-81 and 140-160 mg/day) had ≥92.3% probability, and all opioids had ≤53% probability of more pronounced treatment effects than the minimal clinically relevant reduction in pain. 18.5%, 0%, and 83.3% of the oral NSAIDs, topical NSAIDs, and opioids, respectively, had an increased risk of dropouts due to adverse events. 29.8%, 0%, and 89.5% of oral NSAIDs, topical NSAIDs, and opioids, respectively, had an increased risk of any adverse event. Oxymorphone 80 mg/day had the highest risk of dropouts due to adverse events (51%) and any adverse event (88%). CONCLUSIONS: Etoricoxib 60 mg/day and diclofenac 150 mg/day seem to be the most effective oral NSAIDs for pain and function in patients with osteoarthritis. However, these treatments are probably not appropriate for patients with comorbidities or for long term use because of the slight increase in the risk of adverse events. Additionally, an increased risk of dropping out due to adverse events was found for diclofenac 150 mg/day. Topical diclofenac 70-81 mg/day seems to be effective and generally safer because of reduced systemic exposure and lower dose, and should be considered as first line pharmacological treatment for knee osteoarthritis. The clinical benefit of opioid treatment, regardless of preparation or dose, does not outweigh the harm it might cause in patients with osteoarthritis. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number CRD42020213656.

Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 3 December 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 1 December 2021 were included in the analysis. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. RESULTS: 463 trials enrolling 166 581 patients were included; 267 (57.7%) trials and 89 814 (53.9%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 265 (57.2%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, three drugs reduced mortality in patients with mostly severe disease with at least moderate certainty: systemic corticosteroids (risk difference 23 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 40 fewer to 7 fewer, moderate certainty), interleukin-6 receptor antagonists when given with corticosteroids (23 fewer per 1000, 36 fewer to 7 fewer, moderate certainty), and Janus kinase inhibitors (44 fewer per 1000, 64 fewer to 20 fewer, high certainty). Compared with standard care, two drugs probably reduce hospital admission in patients with non-severe disease: nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (36 fewer per 1000, 41 fewer to 26 fewer, moderate certainty) and molnupiravir (19 fewer per 1000, 29 fewer to 5 fewer, moderate certainty). Remdesivir may reduce hospital admission (29 fewer per 1000, 40 fewer to 6 fewer, low certainty). Only molnupiravir had at least moderate quality evidence of a reduction in time to symptom resolution (3.3 days fewer, 4.8 fewer to 1.6 fewer, moderate certainty); several others showed a possible benefit. Several drugs may increase the risk of adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation; hydroxychloroquine probably increases the risk of mechanical ventilation (moderate certainty). CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids, interleukin-6 receptor antagonists, and Janus kinase inhibitors probably reduce mortality and confer other important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir probably reduce admission to hospital in patients with non-severe covid-19. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fifth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.