Assessing Representativeness of Randomised Controlled Trials using Serious Adverse Events

Peter Hanlon, David McAllister, Sarah Wild, Frances Mair, Bruce Guthrie, Elaine Butterly, Nicky Welton, Laurie Hannigan

Research output: Contribution to conferenceConference Paperpeer-review

Abstract

Context: The applicability of randomised controlled trials of pharmacological agents to older people with frailty/multimorbidity is often uncertain, due to concerns that trials are not representative. However, assessing trial representativeness is challenging and complex.

Objectives: We explore an approach assessing trial representativeness by comparing rates of trial Serious Adverse Events (SAEs: most of which reflect hospitalisations/deaths) to rates of hospitalisation/death in routine care (which, in a trial setting, would be SAEs be definition).

Study design: Secondary analysis of trial and routine healthcare data. Dataset and population: 483 trials (n=636,267) from clinicaltrials.gov across 21 index conditions. A routine care comparison was identified from SAIL databank (n=2.3M).

Instrument: SAIL data were used to derive the expected rate of hospitalisations/deaths by age, sex and index condition.

Outcomes: We calculated the expected number of SAEs for each trial compared to the observed number of SAEs (observed/expected SAE ratio). We then re-calculated the observed/expected SAE ratio additionally accounting for comorbidity count in 125 trials for which we accessed individual participant data.

Results: For 12/21 index conditions the observed/expected SAE ratio was <1, indicating fewer SAEs in trials than expected given community rates of hospitalisations and deaths. A further 6/21 had point estimates <1 but the 95% CI included the null. The median observed/expected SAE ratio was 0.60 (95% CI 0.56-0.65; COPD) and the interquartile range was 0.44 (0.34-0.55; Parkinson’s disease) to 0.88 (0.59-1.33; IBD). Higher comorbidity count was associated with SAEs/hospitalisations and deaths across index conditions. For most trials, the observed/expected ratio was attenuated but remained <1 after additionally accounting for comorbidity count.

Conclusion: Trial participants experience fewer SAEs than expected based on age/sex/condition hospitalisation and death rates in routine care, confirming the predicted lack of representativeness. This difference is only partially explained by differences in multimorbidity. Assessing observed/expected SAE may help assess applicability of trial findings to older populations in whom multimorbidity and frailty are common.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 24 Jan 2023
Event50TH ANNUAL NORTH AMERICAN PRIMARY CARE RESEARCH GROUP (NAPCRG) CONFERENCE - Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Duration: 18 Nov 202222 Nov 2022
https://napcrg.org/conferences/annual/na-pastconferences/2022/

Conference

Conference50TH ANNUAL NORTH AMERICAN PRIMARY CARE RESEARCH GROUP (NAPCRG) CONFERENCE
Abbreviated titleNAPCRG
Country/TerritoryUnited States
CityPhoenix, Arizona
Period18/11/2222/11/22
Internet address

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

Keywords

  • Humans
  • Aged
  • Frailty
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing Representativeness of Randomised Controlled Trials using Serious Adverse Events'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this