Dataset Information

Systematic review of statistical methods for safety data in malaria chemoprevention in pregnancy trials.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Drug safety assessments in clinical trials present unique analytical challenges. Some of these include adjusting for individual follow-up time, repeated measurements of multiple outcomes and missing data among others. Furthermore, pre-specifying appropriate analysis becomes difficult as some safety endpoints are unexpected. Although existing guidelines such as CONSORT encourage thorough reporting of adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials, they provide limited details for safety data analysis. The limited guidelines may influence suboptimal analysis by failing to account for some analysis challenges above. A typical example where such challenges exist are trials of anti-malarial drugs for malaria prevention during pregnancy. Lack of proper standardized evaluation of the safety of antimalarial drugs has limited the ability to draw conclusions about safety. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to establish the current practice in statistical analysis for preventive antimalarial drug safety in pregnancy. METHODS:The search included five databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Malaria in Pregnancy Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) to identify original English articles reporting Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anti-malarial drugs for malaria prevention in pregnancy published from January 2010 to July 2019. RESULTS:Eighteen trials were included in this review that collected multiple longitudinal safety outcomes including AEs. Statistical analysis and reporting of the safety outcomes in all the trials used descriptive statistics; proportions/counts (n?=?18, 100%) and mean/median (n?=?2, 11.1%). Results presentation included tabular (n?=?16, 88.9%) and text description (n?=?2, 11.1%). Univariate inferential methods were reported in most trials (n?=?16, 88.9%); including Chi square/Fisher's exact test (n?=?12, 66.7%), t test (n?=?2, 11.1%) and Mann-Whitney/Wilcoxon test (n?=?1, 5.6%). Multivariable methods, including Poisson and negative binomial were reported in few trials (n?=?3, 16.7%). Assessment of a potential link between missing efficacy data and safety outcomes was not reported in any of the trials that reported efficacy missing data (n?=?7, 38.9%). CONCLUSION:The review demonstrated that statistical analysis of safety data in anti-malarial drugs for malarial chemoprevention in pregnancy RCTs is inadequate. The analyses insufficiently account for multiple safety outcomes potential dependence, follow-up time and informative missing data which can compromise anti-malarial drug safety evidence development, based on the available data.

SUBMITTER: Patson N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7085184 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of statistical methods for safety data in malaria chemoprevention in pregnancy trials.

Patson Noel N Mukaka Mavuto M Otwombe Kennedy N KN Kazembe Lawrence L Mathanga Don P DP Mwapasa Victor V Kabaghe Alinune N AN Eijkemans Marinus J C MJC Laufer Miriam K MK Chirwa Tobias T

Malaria journal 20200320 1

<h4>Background</h4>Drug safety assessments in clinical trials present unique analytical challenges. Some of these include adjusting for individual follow-up time, repeated measurements of multiple outcomes and missing data among others. Furthermore, pre-specifying appropriate analysis becomes difficult as some safety endpoints are unexpected. Although existing guidelines such as CONSORT encourage thorough reporting of adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials, they provide limited details for safe ...[more]

PMID: 32197619

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSevere anaemia is associated with high in-hospital mortality among young children. In malaria-endemic areas, surviving children also have an increased risk of mortality or readmission after hospital discharge. We conducted a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of monthly post-discharge malaria chemoprevention in children recovering from severe anaemia.MethodsThis analysis was conducted according to PRISMA-IPD guidelines. We searched multiple databases on Aug 28, 2023, without date or language restrictions, for randomised controlled trials comparing monthly post-discharge malaria chemoprevention with placebo or standard of care among children (aged <15 years) admitted with severe anaemia in malaria-endemic Africa. Trials using daily or weekly malaria prophylaxis were not eligible. The investigators from all eligible trials shared pseudonymised datasets, which were standardised and merged for analysis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality during the intervention period. Analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population, including all randomly assigned participants who contributed to the endpoint. Fixed-effects two-stage meta-analysis of risk ratios (RRs) was used to generate pooled effect estimates for mortality. Recurrent time-to-event data (readmissions or clinic visits) were analysed using one-stage mixed-effects Prentice-Williams-Peterson total-time models to obtain hazard ratios (HRs). This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022308791.FindingsOur search identified 91 articles, of which 78 were excluded by title and abstract, and a further ten did not meet eligibility criteria. Three double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, including 3663 children with severe anaemia, were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis; 3507 (95·7%) contributed to the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Participants received monthly sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine until the end of the malaria transmission season (mean 3·1 courses per child [range 1-6]; n=1085; The Gambia), monthly artemether-lumefantrine given at the end of weeks 4 and 8 post discharge (n=1373; Malawi), or monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine given at the end of weeks 2, 6, and 10 post discharge (n=1049; Uganda and Kenya). During the intervention period, post-discharge malaria chemoprevention was associated with a 77% reduction in mortality (RR 0·23 [95% CI 0·08-0·70], p=0·0094, I2=0%) and a 55% reduction in all-cause readmissions (HR 0·45 [95% CI 0·36-0·56], p<0·0001) compared with placebo. The protective effect was restricted to the intervention period and was not sustained after the direct pharmacodynamic effect of the drugs had waned. The small number of trials limited our ability to assess heterogeneity, its sources, and publication bias.InterpretationIn malaria-endemic Africa, post-discharge malaria chemoprevention reduces mortality and readmissions in recently discharged children recovering from severe anaemia. Post-discharge malaria chemoprevention could be a valuable strategy for the management of this group at high risk. Future research should focus on methods of delivery, options to prolong the protection duration, other hospitalised groups at high risk, and interventions targeting non-malarial causes of post-discharge morbidity.FundingThe Research-Council of Norway and the Bill-&-Melinda-Gates-Foundation through the Worldwide-Antimalarial-Research-Network.

Project description:BackgroundIn non-inferiority trials with non-adherence to interventions (or non-compliance), intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses are often performed; however, non-random non-adherence generally biases these estimates of efficacy.ObjectiveTo identify statistical methods that adjust for the impact of non-adherence and thus estimate the causal effects of experimental interventions in non-inferiority trials.DesignA systematic review was conducted by searching the Ovid MEDLINE database (31 December 2020) to identify (1) randomised trials with a primary analysis for non-inferiority that applied (or planned to apply) statistical methods to account for the impact of non-adherence to interventions, and (2) methodology papers that described such statistical methods and included a non-inferiority trial application.OutcomesThe statistical methods identified, their impacts on non-inferiority conclusions, and their advantages/disadvantages.ResultsA total of 24 papers were included (4 protocols, 13 results papers and 7 methodology papers) reporting relevant methods on 26 occasions. The most common were instrumental variable approaches (n=9), including observed adherence as a covariate within a regression model (n=3), and modelling adherence as a time-varying covariate in a time-to-event analysis (n=3). Other methods included rank preserving structural failure time models and inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting. The methods identified in protocols and results papers were more commonly specified as sensitivity analyses (n=13) than primary analyses (n=3). Twelve results papers included an alternative analysis of the same outcome; conclusions regarding non-inferiority were in agreement on six occasions and could not be compared on six occasions (different measures of effect or results not provided in full).ConclusionsAvailable statistical methods which attempt to account for the impact of non-adherence to interventions were used infrequently. Therefore, firm inferences about their influence on non-inferiority conclusions could not be drawn. Since intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses do not guarantee unbiased conclusions regarding non-inferiority, the methods identified should be considered for use in sensitivity analyses.Prospero registration numberCRD42020177458.

Project description:BackgroundMalaria infection during pregnancy is an important cause of maternal and infant mortality and morbidity with the greatest effect being concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa. In areas of moderate to high malaria transmission, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the administration of intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy (IPTp) using sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) to be given to all pregnant women at each scheduled antenatal care visit at monthly intervals. However, there is concern that increased resistance has compromised its effectiveness. This has led to a need for evaluation of alternatives to SP for IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) emerging as a very promising candidate. Thus, this systematic review and aggregated data meta-analysis was conducted to establish the safety and tolerability of repeated doses with DP in IPTp.MethodsA systematic review and aggregated data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed by searching electronic databases of PubMed, Science Direct, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar. RCTs comparing IPTp DP versus recommended standard treatment for IPTp with these outcome measures were analyzed; change in QTc interval, serious adverse events (SAE), grade 3 or 4 adverse events possibly related to study drug and vomiting within 30 min after study drug administration. The search was performed up to 24th June 2023. Data was extracted from eligible studies and an aggregated data meta-analysis was carried out with data pooled as risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), using RevMan software (5.4). This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022310041.ResultsSix RCTs involving 7969 participants were included in this systematic review and aggregated data meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that DP was associated with a change from baseline of the QTc interval although this change was not associated with cardiotoxicity. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of occurrence of SAEs among participants in both treatment groups (RR = 0.80, 95% CI [0.52-1.24], P = 0.32). However, significant difference was observed in grade 3 or 4 AEs possibly related to study drug where analysis showed that subjects on IPT DP were statistically significantly more likely to experience an AE possibly related to study drug than subjects on IPT SP (RR = 6.65, 95% CI [1.18-37.54], P = 0.03) and in vomiting within 30 min after study drug administration where analysis showed that the risk of vomiting is statistically significantly higher in subjects receiving IPT DP than in subjects receiving IPT SP (RR = 1.77, 95% CI [1.02-3.07], P = 0.04).ConclusionDP was associated with a higher risk of grade 3 or 4 AEs possibly related to study drug and a higher risk of vomiting within 30 min after study drug administration. However, these were experienced in a very small percentage of women and did not affect adherence to study drugs. DP was also better tolerated in these studies as compared to most alternatives that have been proposed to replace SP which have proved to be too poorly tolerated in IPTp use.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Statistical methods for the analysis of harm outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are rarely used, and there is a reliance on simple approaches to display information such as in frequency tables. We aimed to identify whether any statistical methods had been specifically developed to analyse prespecified secondary harm outcomes and non-specific emerging adverse events (AEs). METHODS:A scoping review was undertaken to identify articles that proposed original methods or the original application of existing methods for the analysis of AEs that aimed to detect potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in phase II-IV parallel controlled group trials. Methods where harm outcomes were the (co)-primary outcome were excluded. Information was extracted on methodological characteristics such as: whether the method required the event to be prespecified or could be used to screen emerging events; and whether it was applied to individual events or the overall AE profile. Each statistical method was appraised and a taxonomy was developed for classification. RESULTS:Forty-four eligible articles proposing 73 individual methods were included. A taxonomy was developed and articles were categorised as: visual summary methods (8 articles proposing 20 methods); hypothesis testing methods (11 articles proposing 16 methods); estimation methods (15 articles proposing 24 methods); or methods that provide decision-making probabilities (10 articles proposing 13 methods). Methods were further classified according to whether they required a prespecified event (9 articles proposing 12 methods), or could be applied to emerging events (35 articles proposing 61 methods); and if they were (group) sequential methods (10 articles proposing 12 methods) or methods to perform final/one analyses (34 articles proposing 61 methods). CONCLUSIONS:This review highlighted that a broad range of methods exist for AE analysis. Immediate implementation of some of these could lead to improved inference for AE data in RCTs. For example, a well-designed graphic can be an effective means to communicate complex AE data and methods appropriate for counts, time-to-event data and that avoid dichotomising continuous outcomes can improve efficiencies in analysis. Previous research has shown that adoption of such methods in the scientific press is limited and that strategies to support change are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=97442.

Project description:Malaria during pregnancy, particularly Plasmodium falciparum malaria, has been linked to increased morbidity and mortality, which must be reduced by both preventive measures and effective case management. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) to treat uncomplicated falciparum malaria during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy, and quinine plus clindamycin during the first trimester. However, the national policies of many African countries currently recommend quinine throughout pregnancy. Therefore, the aim of this article is to provide a summary of the available data on the safety and efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) in pregnancy. An English-language search identified 16 publications from 1989 to October 2011 with reports of artemether or AL exposure in pregnancy, including randomized clinical trials, observational studies and systematic reviews. Overall, there were 1,103 reports of AL use in pregnant women: 890 second/third trimester exposures; 212 first trimester exposures; and one case where the trimester of exposure was not reported. In the second and third trimesters, AL was not associated with increased adverse pregnancy outcomes as compared with quinine or sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine, showed improved tolerability relative to quinine, and its efficacy was non-inferior to quinine. There is evidence to suggest that the pharmacokinetics of anti-malarial drugs may change in pregnancy, although the impact on efficacy and safety needs to be studied further, especially since the majority of studies report high cure rates and adequate tolerability. As there are fewer reports of AL safety in the first trimester, additional data are required to assess the potential to use AL in the first trimester. Though the available safety and efficacy data support the use of AL in the second and third trimesters, there is still a need for further information. These findings reinforce the WHO recommendation to treat uncomplicated falciparum malaria with quinine plus clindamycin in early pregnancy and ACT in later pregnancy.

Project description:BackgroundRoutine data are increasingly used in randomised controlled trials evaluating healthcare interventions. They can aid participant identification, outcome assessment, and intervention delivery. Randomised implementation trials evaluate the effect of implementation strategies on implementation outcomes. Implementation strategies, such as reminders, are used to increase the uptake of evidence-based interventions into practice, while implementation outcomes, such as adoption, are key measures of the implementation process. The use of routine data in effectiveness trials has been explored; however, there are no reviews on implementation trials. We therefore aimed to describe how routine data have been used in randomised implementation trials and the design characteristics of these trials.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE (Ovid) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from Jan 2000 to Dec 2021 and manually searched protocols from trial registers. We included implementation trials and type II and type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trials conducted using routine data. We extracted quantitative and qualitative data and narratively synthesised findings.ResultsFrom 4206 titles, we included 80 trials, of which 22.5% targeted implementation of evidence-based clinical guidelines. Multicomponent implementation strategies were more commonly evaluated (70.0%) than single strategies. Most trials assessed adoption as the primary outcome (65.0%). The majority of trials extracted data from electronic health records (EHRs) (62.5%), and 91.3% used routine data for outcome ascertainment. Reported reasons for using routine data were increasing efficiency, assessing outcomes, reducing research burden, improving quality of care, identifying study samples, confirming findings, and assessing representativeness. Data quality, the EHR system, research governance, and external factors such as government policy could act either as facilitators or barriers.ConclusionsAdherence to guidance on designing and reporting implementation studies, and specifically to harmonise the language used in describing implementation strategies and implementation outcomes, would aid identification of studies and data extraction. Routine healthcare data are widely used for participant identification, outcome assessment and intervention delivery. Researchers should familiarise themselves with the barriers and facilitators to using routine data, and efforts could be made to improve data quality to overcome some of the barriers.RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42022292321.

Project description:IntroductionNon-compliance is a common challenge for researchers and may reduce the power of an intention-to-treat analysis. Whilst a per protocol approach attempts to deal with this issue, it can result in biased estimates. Several methods to resolve this issue have been identified in previous reviews, but there is limited evidence supporting their use. This review aimed to identify simulation studies which compare such methods, assess the extent to which certain methods have been investigated and determine their performance under various scenarios.MethodsA systematic search of several electronic databases including MEDLINE and Scopus was carried out from conception to 30th November 2022. Included papers were published in a peer-reviewed journal, readily available in the English language and focused on comparing relevant methods in a superiority randomised controlled trial under a simulation study. Articles were screened using these criteria and a predetermined extraction form used to identify relevant information. A quality assessment appraised the risk of bias in individual studies. Extracted data was synthesised using tables, figures and a narrative summary. Both screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers with disagreements resolved by consensus.ResultsOf 2325 papers identified, 267 full texts were screened and 17 studies finally included. Twelve methods were identified across papers. Instrumental variable methods were commonly considered, but many authors found them to be biased in some settings. Non-compliance was generally assumed to be all-or-nothing and only occurring in the intervention group, although some methods considered it as time-varying. Simulation studies commonly varied the level and type of non-compliance and factors such as effect size and strength of confounding. The quality of papers was generally good, although some lacked detail and justification. Therefore, their conclusions were deemed to be less reliable.ConclusionsIt is common for papers to consider instrumental variable methods but more studies are needed that consider G-methods and compare a wide range of methods in realistic scenarios. It is difficult to make conclusions about the best method to deal with non-compliance due to a limited body of evidence and the difficulty in combining results from independent simulation studies.Prospero registration numberCRD42022370910.

Dataset Information

Systematic review of statistical methods for safety data in malaria chemoprevention in pregnancy trials.

Publications

Systematic review of statistical methods for safety data in malaria chemoprevention in pregnancy trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets