Cargando…

Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment

OBJECTIVES: Prospective observational studies (OSs) that collect adequate information about confounders can validly assess treatment consequences. However, what constitutes adequate information is unknown. This study investigated whether the extensive information collected by the Women's Health...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hartz, Arthur, He, Tao, Wallace, Robert, Powers, John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3717474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23861441
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002556
_version_ 1782277699119611904
author Hartz, Arthur
He, Tao
Wallace, Robert
Powers, John
author_facet Hartz, Arthur
He, Tao
Wallace, Robert
Powers, John
author_sort Hartz, Arthur
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Prospective observational studies (OSs) that collect adequate information about confounders can validly assess treatment consequences. However, what constitutes adequate information is unknown. This study investigated whether the extensive information collected by the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) in two OSs and two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was adequate. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of WHI data. Cox regression was used to select from all baseline risk factors those that best predicted outcome. Cox regression that included these risk factors was used for two types of analyses: (1) comparing RCT and OS assessments of the effects of hormone therapy on outcome for participants with specific characteristics and (2) evaluating whether adjustment for measured confounders could eliminate outcome differences among datasets. SETTING: The WHI included more than 800 baseline risk factors and outcomes during a median follow-up of 8 years. PARTICIPANTS: 151 870 postmenopausal women ages 50–79. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Myocardial infarction and stroke. RESULTS: RCT and OS results differed for the association of hormone therapy with outcome after adjusting for confounding factors and stratifying on factors that were hypothesised to modulate the effects of hormone therapy (eg, age and time since menopause) or that empirically modulated the effects of hormone therapy in this dataset (eg, blood pressure, previous coronary revascularisation and private medical insurance). Some of the four WHI datasets had significantly worse outcomes than others even after adjusting for risk and stratifying by type of hormone therapy, for example, the risk-adjusted HR for myocardial infarction was 1.37 (p<0.0001) in an RCT placebo group compared with an OS group not taking hormone therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Apparently the WHI did not collect sufficient information to give reliable assessments of treatment effects. If the WHI did not collect sufficient data, it is likely that few OSs collect sufficient information.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3717474
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37174742013-07-22 Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment Hartz, Arthur He, Tao Wallace, Robert Powers, John BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice OBJECTIVES: Prospective observational studies (OSs) that collect adequate information about confounders can validly assess treatment consequences. However, what constitutes adequate information is unknown. This study investigated whether the extensive information collected by the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) in two OSs and two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was adequate. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of WHI data. Cox regression was used to select from all baseline risk factors those that best predicted outcome. Cox regression that included these risk factors was used for two types of analyses: (1) comparing RCT and OS assessments of the effects of hormone therapy on outcome for participants with specific characteristics and (2) evaluating whether adjustment for measured confounders could eliminate outcome differences among datasets. SETTING: The WHI included more than 800 baseline risk factors and outcomes during a median follow-up of 8 years. PARTICIPANTS: 151 870 postmenopausal women ages 50–79. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Myocardial infarction and stroke. RESULTS: RCT and OS results differed for the association of hormone therapy with outcome after adjusting for confounding factors and stratifying on factors that were hypothesised to modulate the effects of hormone therapy (eg, age and time since menopause) or that empirically modulated the effects of hormone therapy in this dataset (eg, blood pressure, previous coronary revascularisation and private medical insurance). Some of the four WHI datasets had significantly worse outcomes than others even after adjusting for risk and stratifying by type of hormone therapy, for example, the risk-adjusted HR for myocardial infarction was 1.37 (p<0.0001) in an RCT placebo group compared with an OS group not taking hormone therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Apparently the WHI did not collect sufficient information to give reliable assessments of treatment effects. If the WHI did not collect sufficient data, it is likely that few OSs collect sufficient information. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3717474/ /pubmed/23861441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002556 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
spellingShingle Evidence Based Practice
Hartz, Arthur
He, Tao
Wallace, Robert
Powers, John
Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment
title Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment
title_full Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment
title_fullStr Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment
title_full_unstemmed Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment
title_short Comparing hormone therapy effects in two RCTs and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment
title_sort comparing hormone therapy effects in two rcts and two large observational studies that used similar methods for comprehensive data collection and outcome assessment
topic Evidence Based Practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3717474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23861441
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002556
work_keys_str_mv AT hartzarthur comparinghormonetherapyeffectsintworctsandtwolargeobservationalstudiesthatusedsimilarmethodsforcomprehensivedatacollectionandoutcomeassessment
AT hetao comparinghormonetherapyeffectsintworctsandtwolargeobservationalstudiesthatusedsimilarmethodsforcomprehensivedatacollectionandoutcomeassessment
AT wallacerobert comparinghormonetherapyeffectsintworctsandtwolargeobservationalstudiesthatusedsimilarmethodsforcomprehensivedatacollectionandoutcomeassessment
AT powersjohn comparinghormonetherapyeffectsintworctsandtwolargeobservationalstudiesthatusedsimilarmethodsforcomprehensivedatacollectionandoutcomeassessment