Dataset Information

Use of pragmatic randomized trials in multiple sclerosis: A systematic overview.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Pragmatic trials are increasingly recognized for providing real-world evidence on treatment choices.

Objective

The objective of this study is to investigate the use and characteristics of pragmatic trials in multiple sclerosis (MS).

Methods

Systematic literature search and analysis of pragmatic trials on any intervention published up to 2022. The assessment of pragmatism with PRECIS-2 (PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2) is performed.

Results

We identified 48 pragmatic trials published 1967-2022 that included a median of 82 participants (interquartile range (IQR) = 42-160) to assess typically supportive care interventions (n = 41; 85%). Only seven trials assessed drugs (15%). Only three trials (6%) included >500 participants. Trials were mostly from the United Kingdom (n = 18; 38%), Italy (n = 6; 13%), the United States and Denmark (each n = 5; 10%). Primary outcomes were diverse, for example, quality-of-life, physical functioning, or disease activity. Only 1 trial (2%) used routinely collected data for outcome ascertainment. No trial was very pragmatic in all design aspects, but 14 trials (29%) were widely pragmatic (i.e. PRECIS-2 score ⩾ 4/5 in all domains).

Conclusion

Only few and mostly small pragmatic trials exist in MS which rarely assess drugs. Despite the widely available routine data infrastructures, very few trials utilize them. There is an urgent need to leverage the potential of this pioneering study design to provide useful randomized real-world evidence.

SUBMITTER: Hirt J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11010556 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of pragmatic randomized trials in multiple sclerosis: A systematic overview.

Hirt Julian J Janiaud Perrine P Düblin Pascal P Nicoletti Giovanni Jacopo GJ Dembowska Kinga K Nguyen Thao Vy Thi TVT Woelfle Tim T Axfors Cathrine C Yaldizli Özgür Ö Granziera Cristina C Kuhle Jens J Kappos Ludwig L Hemkens Lars G LG

Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) 20240122 4-5

<h4>Background</h4>Pragmatic trials are increasingly recognized for providing real-world evidence on treatment choices.<h4>Objective</h4>The objective of this study is to investigate the use and characteristics of pragmatic trials in multiple sclerosis (MS).<h4>Methods</h4>Systematic literature search and analysis of pragmatic trials on any intervention published up to 2022. The assessment of pragmatism with PRECIS-2 (PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2) is performed.<h4>Results< ...[more]

PMID: 38253528

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for progressive multiple sclerosis (PMS) are widely used in clinical practice. At the same time, there are a variety of drug options for DMTs, but the effect of the drugs that can better relieve symptoms and improve the prognosis are still inconclusive.ObjectivesThis systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMTs for PMS and to identify the best among these drugs.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were systematically searched to identify relevant studies published before 30 January, 2023. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the confidence in the network meta-analysis (CINeMA) framework. We estimated the summary risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% credible intervals (CrIs).ResultsWe included 18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 9,234 patients in the study. DMT can effectively control the disease progression of MS. Among them, mitoxantrone, siponimod, and ocrelizumab are superior to other drug options in delaying disease progression (high certainty). Mitoxantrone was the best (with high certainty) for mitigating deterioration (progression of disability). Ocrelizumab performed best on the pre- and post-treatment Timed 25-Foot Walk test (T25FW; low certainty), as did all other agents (RR range: 1.12-1.05). In the 9-Hole Peg Test (9HPT), natalizumab performed the best (high certainty), as did all other agents (RR range: 1.59-1.09). In terms of imaging, IFN-beta-1b performed better on the new T2 hypointense lesion on contrast, before and after treatment (high certainty), while siponimod performed best on the change from baseline in the total volume of lesions on T2-weighted image contrast before and after treatment (high certainty), and sWASO had the highest area under the curve (SUCRA) value (100%). In terms of adverse events (AEs), rituximab (RR 1.01), and laquinimod (RR 1.02) were more effective than the placebo (high certainty). In terms of serious adverse events (SAEs), natalizumab (RR 1.09), and ocrelizumab (RR 1.07) were safer than placebo (high certainty).ConclusionDMTs can effectively control disease progression and reduce disease deterioration during the treatment of PMS.Systematic review registrationhttps://inplasy.com/?s=202320071, identifier: 202320071.

Project description:BackgroundSmoking remains one of the major public health threats, necessitating substantial scientific and societal interest in further developing and implementing systematic, smoking cessation trials. This review examines ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on smoking cessation and harm reduction, focusing on adherence to German S3 guidelines for tobacco dependence and identifying areas needing further research and neglected aspects in the implementation of treatment guidelines for tobacco dependence.MethodsA systematic search was conducted on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, comprising multiple trial registries worldwide, to identify ongoing RCTs focusing on smoking cessation and harm reduction. Utilizing the PICOS-scheme, we focused on trials targeting the general population, with biochemical verification, psychological counseling, telemedicine, and nicotine replacement therapy /smoking cessation medication or electronic nicotine delivery systems. Exclusion criteria included trials marked as "completed," "terminated," "unknown," or "withdrawn.".ResultsThe review identified 30 ongoing RCTs, with a majority located in North America. A significant number of trials focus on socioeconomically disadvantaged or uninsured populations, while few address cancer survivors or individuals with smoking-related diseases. Nicotine replacement therapy or smoking cessation medication is consistently used across trials, but with varying regimens. Psychotherapeutic interventions are employed in 22 trials, with motivational interviewing being the most common method. Only four trials utilize electronic nicotine delivery systems as a harm reduction strategy. The lack of standardized reporting in trial registries was a significant barrier to synthesizing and categorizing information. Geographic representation is predominantly in North America, suggesting a need for more diverse trial locations.ConclusionsThere is a critical need for more RCTs involving electronic nicotine delivery systems and tailored psychotherapeutic interventions. Expanding trial locations beyond North America and standardizing trial reporting could enhance the global applicability of smoking cessation strategies. Future research should focus on the long-term risks and benefits of electronic nicotine delivery systems, particularly in high-risk populations. This approach will aid in developing more effective and culturally relevant smoking cessation guidelines.

Project description:Study questionAre systematic reviews published within a 3-year period on interventions in ART concordant in their conclusions?Summary answerThe majority of the systematic reviews published within a 3-year period in the field of assisted reproduction on the same topic had discordant conclusions.What is known alreadySystematic reviews and meta-analyses have now replaced individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the top of the evidence pyramid. There has been a proliferation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, many of which suffer from methodological issues and provide varying conclusions.Study design size durationWe assessed nine interventions in women undergoing ART with at least three systematic reviews each, published from January 2015 to December 2017.Participants/materials setting methodsThe systematic reviews which included RCTs were considered eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was extent of concordance between systematic reviews on the same topic. Secondary outcomes included assessment of quality of systematic reviews, differences in included studies in meta-analyses covering the same search period, selective reporting and reporting the quality of evidence.Main results and the role of chanceConcordant results and conclusions were found in only one topic, with reviews in the remaining eight topics displaying partial discordance. The AMSTAR grading for the majority of the non-Cochrane reviews was critically low whilst it was categorized as high for all of the Cochrane reviews. For three of the nine topics, none of the included systematic reviews assessed the quality of evidence. We were unable to assess selective reporting as most of the reviews did not have a pre-specified published protocol.Limitations reasons for cautionWe were limited by the high proportion of reviews lacking a pre-specified protocol, which made it impossible to assess for selective reporting. Furthermore, many reviews did not specify primary and secondary outcomes which made it difficult to assess reporting bias. All the authors of this review were Cochrane review authors which may introduce some assessment bias. The categorization of the review's conclusions as beneficial, harmful or neutral was subjective, depending on the tone and wording of the conclusion section of the review.Wider implications of the findingsThe majority of the systematic reviews published within a 3-year period on the same topic in the field of assisted reproduction revealed discordant conclusions and suffered from serious methodological issues, hindering the process of informed healthcare decision-making.Study funding/competing interestsAll the authors are Cochrane authors. M.S.K. is an editorial board member of Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. No grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors was obtained.

Dataset Information

Use of pragmatic randomized trials in multiple sclerosis: A systematic overview.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Use of pragmatic randomized trials in multiple sclerosis: A systematic overview.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets