Cargando…

Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial

BACKGROUND: The Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial assigned 4170 potential participants prior to recruitment to blind or non-blind hormone therapy (HT), with placebo or non-treatment the respective alternatives. Before having to decide on participation, women were told whether they...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Veerus, Piret, Fischer, Krista, Hakama, Matti, Hemminki, Elina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341199/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22475112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-44
_version_ 1782231500237832192
author Veerus, Piret
Fischer, Krista
Hakama, Matti
Hemminki, Elina
author_facet Veerus, Piret
Fischer, Krista
Hakama, Matti
Hemminki, Elina
author_sort Veerus, Piret
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial assigned 4170 potential participants prior to recruitment to blind or non-blind hormone therapy (HT), with placebo or non-treatment the respective alternatives. Before having to decide on participation, women were told whether they had been randomised to the blind or non-blind trial. Eligible women who were still willing to join the trial were recruited. After recruitment participants in the non-blind trial (N = 1001) received open-label HT or no treatment, participants in the blind trial (N = 777) remained blinded until the end of the trial. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effect of blinding on internal and external validity of trial outcomes. METHODS: Effect of blinding was calculated as the hazard ratio of selected chronic diseases, total mortality and all outcomes. For analysing the effect of blinding on external validity, the hazard ratios from women recruited to the placebo arm and to the non-treatment arm were compared with those not recruited; for analysing the effect of blinding on internal validity, the hazard ratios from the blind trial were compared with those from the non-blind trial. RESULTS: The women recruited to the placebo arm had less cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.43; 95% CI: 0.26-0.71) and all outcomes combined (HR 0.76; 95% CI: 0.63-0.91) than those who were not recruited. Among women recruited or not recruited to the non-treatment arm, no differences were observed for any of the outcomes studied. Among women recruited to the trial, the risk for coronary heart disease events (HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64-0.93), cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.66; 95%CI: 0.47-0.92), and all outcomes combined (HR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) was smaller among participants in the blind trial than in the non-blind trial. There was no difference between the blind and the non-blind trial for total cancer (HR 0.95; 95% CI: 0.64-1.42), bone fractures (0.93; 95% CI: 0.74-1.16), and total mortality (HR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.53-1.98). CONCLUSIONS: The results from blind and non-blind trials may differ, even if the target population is the same. Blinding may influence both internal and external validity. The effect of blinding may vary for different outcome events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: [ISRCTN35338757]
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3341199
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33411992012-05-02 Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial Veerus, Piret Fischer, Krista Hakama, Matti Hemminki, Elina BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: The Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial assigned 4170 potential participants prior to recruitment to blind or non-blind hormone therapy (HT), with placebo or non-treatment the respective alternatives. Before having to decide on participation, women were told whether they had been randomised to the blind or non-blind trial. Eligible women who were still willing to join the trial were recruited. After recruitment participants in the non-blind trial (N = 1001) received open-label HT or no treatment, participants in the blind trial (N = 777) remained blinded until the end of the trial. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effect of blinding on internal and external validity of trial outcomes. METHODS: Effect of blinding was calculated as the hazard ratio of selected chronic diseases, total mortality and all outcomes. For analysing the effect of blinding on external validity, the hazard ratios from women recruited to the placebo arm and to the non-treatment arm were compared with those not recruited; for analysing the effect of blinding on internal validity, the hazard ratios from the blind trial were compared with those from the non-blind trial. RESULTS: The women recruited to the placebo arm had less cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.43; 95% CI: 0.26-0.71) and all outcomes combined (HR 0.76; 95% CI: 0.63-0.91) than those who were not recruited. Among women recruited or not recruited to the non-treatment arm, no differences were observed for any of the outcomes studied. Among women recruited to the trial, the risk for coronary heart disease events (HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64-0.93), cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.66; 95%CI: 0.47-0.92), and all outcomes combined (HR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) was smaller among participants in the blind trial than in the non-blind trial. There was no difference between the blind and the non-blind trial for total cancer (HR 0.95; 95% CI: 0.64-1.42), bone fractures (0.93; 95% CI: 0.74-1.16), and total mortality (HR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.53-1.98). CONCLUSIONS: The results from blind and non-blind trials may differ, even if the target population is the same. Blinding may influence both internal and external validity. The effect of blinding may vary for different outcome events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: [ISRCTN35338757] BioMed Central 2012-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3341199/ /pubmed/22475112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-44 Text en Copyright ©2012 Veerus et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Veerus, Piret
Fischer, Krista
Hakama, Matti
Hemminki, Elina
Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial
title Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial
title_full Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial
title_fullStr Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial
title_full_unstemmed Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial
title_short Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial
title_sort results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the estonian postmenopausal hormone therapy (epht) trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341199/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22475112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-44
work_keys_str_mv AT veeruspiret resultsfromablindandanonblindrandomisedtrialruninparallelexperiencefromtheestonianpostmenopausalhormonetherapyephttrial
AT fischerkrista resultsfromablindandanonblindrandomisedtrialruninparallelexperiencefromtheestonianpostmenopausalhormonetherapyephttrial
AT hakamamatti resultsfromablindandanonblindrandomisedtrialruninparallelexperiencefromtheestonianpostmenopausalhormonetherapyephttrial
AT hemminkielina resultsfromablindandanonblindrandomisedtrialruninparallelexperiencefromtheestonianpostmenopausalhormonetherapyephttrial