Dataset Information

SOFA and mortality endpoints in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

ABSTRACT: The sequential organ failure assessment score (SOFA) is increasingly used as an endpoint in intensive care randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although serially measured SOFA is independently associated with mortality in observational cohorts, the association between treatment effects on SOFA vs. effects on mortality has not yet been quantified in RCTs. The aim of this study was to quantify the relationship between SOFA and mortality in RCTs and to identify which SOFA derivative best reflects between-group mortality differences.The review protocol was prospectively registered (Prospero CRD42016034014). We performed a literature search (up to May 1, 2016) for RCTs reporting both SOFA and mortality, and analyzed between-group differences in these outcomes. Treatment effects on SOFA and mortality were calculated as the between-group SOFA standardized difference and log odds ratio (OR), respectively. We used random-effects meta-regression to (1) quantify the linear relationship between RCT treatment effects on mortality (logOR) and SOFA (i.e. responsiveness) and (2) quantify residual heterogeneity (i.e. consistency, expressed as I 2).Of 110 eligible RCTs, 87 qualified for analysis. Using all RCTs, SOFA was significantly associated with mortality (slope?=?0.49 (95% CI 0.17; 0.82), p?=?0.006, I 2?=?5%); the overall mortality effect explained by SOFA score (R 2) was 9%. Fifty-eight RCTs used Fixed-day SOFA as an endpoint (i.e. the score on a fixed day after randomization), 25 studies used Delta SOFA as an endpoint (i.e. the trajectory from baseline score) and 15 studies used other SOFA derivatives as an endpoint. Fixed-day SOFA was not significantly associated with mortality (slope?=?0.35 (95% CI -0.04; 0.75), p?=?0.08, I 2?=?12%) and explained 3% of the overall mortality effect (R 2). Delta SOFA was significantly associated with mortality (slope?=?0.70 (95% CI 0.26; 1.14), p?=?0.004, I 2?=?0%) and explained 32% of the overall mortality effect (R 2).Treatment effects on Delta SOFA appear to be reliably and consistently associated with mortality in RCTs. Fixed-day SOFA was the most frequently reported outcome among the reviewed RCTs, but was not significantly associated with mortality. Based on this study, we recommend using Delta SOFA rather than Fixed-day SOFA as an endpoint in future RCTs.

SUBMITTER: de Grooth HJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5324238 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

SOFA and mortality endpoints in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

de Grooth Harm-Jan HJ Geenen Irma L IL Girbes Armand R AR Vincent Jean-Louis JL Parienti Jean-Jacques JJ Oudemans-van Straaten Heleen M HM

Critical care (London, England) 20170224 1

<h4>Background</h4>The sequential organ failure assessment score (SOFA) is increasingly used as an endpoint in intensive care randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although serially measured SOFA is independently associated with mortality in observational cohorts, the association between treatment effects on SOFA vs. effects on mortality has not yet been quantified in RCTs. The aim of this study was to quantify the relationship between SOFA and mortality in RCTs and to identify which SOFA derivat ...[more]

PMID: 28231816

Similar Datasets

Project description:Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) about Ezetimibe's efficacy on patient-oriented outcomes have given discordant results. The aim of this study was to determine the net effect of Ezetimibe and of the widely marketed combination, Ezetimibe+simvastatin, on mortality and morbidity outcomes.We searched for RCT on Ezetimibe using MEDLINE, CCTR, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov databases up to December 2013, Merck and Novartis online registers, and personal communications. Two authors independently selected trials fulfilling these criteria: RCTs comparing Ezetimibe±statin or another lipid-lowering drug against placebo, or against the same lipid-lowering drug at the same dosage, with a follow-up at least 24 weeks and one or more of these outcomes: all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), cancer, serious adverse events (SAEs); we assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane checklist. We extracted the data for major clinical events as a dichotomous measure, with the patient the unit of analysis. Pooled analysis was done with random and fixed effect based models. Trials comparing Ezetimibe plus a lipid-lowering drug against the same lipidlowering drug representing the net effect of Ezetimibe, showed a nonsignificant tendency toward damage for cancer, MI, stroke and SAEs. Ezetimibe+simvastatin vs. simvastatin alone showed a stronger tendency towards a higher risk for all-cause death (2.52; 0.65-9.74), CV death (3.04; 0.48-19.21), non-CV death (3.03; 0.12-73.50), MI (1.91; 0.42-8.70), stroke (2.38; 0.46-12.35), cancer (RR 11.11; 0.62-198.29), and SAEs (1.45; 0.95-2.23). Limitations include small numbers of events and inadequate power of the pooling. Trials comparing Ezetimibe+simvastatin vs placebo showed non-significant effects: MI (0.81; 0.66-1.00 p = 0.051), all-cause death (1.02; 0.95-1.09), CV death (0.91; 0.80-1.04), non-CV death (108; 0.99-1.18), stroke (0.86; 0.72-1.04), cancer (1.18; 0.80-1.74), SAEs (1.01; 0.96-1.06).Ezetimibe±simvastatin had inconsistent effects on important outcomes. No firm conclusions are possible, but findings indicative of damage suggest much more selective use of Ezetimibe±simvastatin.

Project description:In 2012, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning regarding potential adverse effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) on cognition, based on the Adverse Events Reporting System and a review of the medical literature. We aimed to synthesize randomized clinical trial (RCTs) evidence on the association between statin therapy and cognitive outcomes.We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL through December 2012, and reviewed published systematic reviews of statin treatment. We sought RCTs that compared statin treatment versus placebo or standard care, and reported at least one cognitive outcome (frequency of adverse cognitive events or measurements using standard neuropsychological cognitive test scores). Studies reporting sufficient information to calculate effect sizes were included in meta-analyses. Standardized and unstandardized mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes for global cognition and for pre-specified cognitive domains. The main outcome was change in cognition measured by neuropsychological tests; an outcome of secondary interest was the frequency of adverse cognitive events observed during follow-up.We identified 25 RCTs (all placebo-controlled) reporting cognitive outcomes in 46,836 subjects, of which 23 RCTs reported cognitive test results in 29,012 participants. Adverse cognitive outcomes attributable to statins were rarely reported in trials involving cognitively normal or impaired subjects. Furthermore, meta-analysis of cognitive test data (14 studies; 27,643 participants) failed to show significant adverse effects of statins on all tests of cognition in either cognitively normal subjects (standardized mean difference 0.01, 95% confidence interval, CI, -0.01 to 0.03, p?=?0.42) or Alzheimer's disease subjects (standardized mean difference -0.05, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10, p?=?0.38).Statin therapy was not associated with cognitive impairment in RCTs. These results raise questions regarding the continued merit of the FDA warning about potential adverse effects of statins on cognition.

Project description:Background Aging is a phenomenon universally involving all organisms, genetically determined, and epigenetically influenced by the environment. Numerous observational studies have shown the positive impact of non-pharmacological approaches started in younger age on chronic conditions affecting the elderly health and survival. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effect of beta-carotene on the total and cause-specific mortality as reported by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods We searched Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL Cochrane from inception to September 2021. Studies were eligible if enrolled adults with any health condition, compared beta-carotene supplements at any dose with placebo or no intervention, provided information on deaths from any cause, and were RCTs, in English. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE. Risk ratios and their 95% confidence intervals were used and a P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Among 3,942 articles searched, 44 articles on 31 RCTs, which included 216,734 total subjects, 108,622 in beta-carotene supplement groups, and 108,112 in the placebo or no-intervention groups, were involved in the final analyses. In a random-effects meta-analysis of all 31 trials, beta-carotene supplements were found to have no preventive effect on mortality (risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.98–1.05, I2 = 42%). Further, the analysis showed no preventive effect on cancer, cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and other mortality causes. Instead, beta-carotene supplementation significantly increased the risk of lung cancer mortality (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02, 1.27, I2 = 3%) but decreased the risk of human immunodeficiency virus-related mortality (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33, 0.92, I2 = 0). Conclusion More studies should be performed to better define the role of beta-carotene on survival, to confirm or deny our results. Therefore, the possible beneficial or harmful effects of the beta-carotene supplementation on mortality must not be overstated. Systematic Review Registration [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=259354], identifier [CRD42021259354].

Dataset Information

SOFA and mortality endpoints in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Publications

SOFA and mortality endpoints in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets