Cargando…

Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to assess opportunities for trial streamlining and the scientific impact of adjudication on kidney and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We analyzed the effects of adjudication of approximately 2100 maintenance kidney replacement therapy (K...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Herrington, William G., Harper, Charlie, Staplin, Natalie, Haynes, Richard, Emberson, Jonathan R., Reith, Christina, Hooi, Lai Seong, Levin, Adeera, Wanner, Christoph, Baigent, Colin, Landray, Martin J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7614871/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37538810
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ekir.2023.05.008
_version_ 1783605661376970752
author Herrington, William G.
Harper, Charlie
Staplin, Natalie
Haynes, Richard
Emberson, Jonathan R.
Reith, Christina
Hooi, Lai Seong
Levin, Adeera
Wanner, Christoph
Baigent, Colin
Landray, Martin J.
author_facet Herrington, William G.
Harper, Charlie
Staplin, Natalie
Haynes, Richard
Emberson, Jonathan R.
Reith, Christina
Hooi, Lai Seong
Levin, Adeera
Wanner, Christoph
Baigent, Colin
Landray, Martin J.
author_sort Herrington, William G.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: We aimed to assess opportunities for trial streamlining and the scientific impact of adjudication on kidney and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We analyzed the effects of adjudication of approximately 2100 maintenance kidney replacement therapy (KRT) and approximately 1300 major atherosclerotic events (MAEs) recorded in the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP). We first compared outcome classification before adjudication versus after adjudication, and then reran randomized comparisons using preadjudicated follow-up data. RESULTS: For maintenance KRT, adjudication had little impact with only 1% of events being refuted (28/2115). Consequently, randomized comparisons using preadjudication reports found almost identical results (preadjudication: simvastatin/ezetimibe 1038 vs. placebo 1077; rate ratio [RR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88–1.04; postadjudicated: 1057 vs. 1084; RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.89–1.05). For MAEs, about one-quarter of patient reports were refuted (324/1275 [25%]); and reviewing 3538 other potential vascular events and death reports identified only 194 additional MAEs. Nevertheless, randomized analyses using SHARP’s preadjudicated data alone found similar results to analyses based on adjudicated outcomes (preadjudication: 573 vs. 702; RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.72–0.89; adjudicated: 526 vs. 619; RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.74–0.94); and also suggested that refuted MAEs were likely to represent atherosclerotic disease (RR for refuted MAEs = 0.80, 95% CI 0.65–1.00). CONCLUSIONS: These analyses provide 3 key insights. First, they provide a rationale for nephrology trials not to adjudicate maintenance KRT. Second, when an event that mimics an atherosclerotic outcome is not expected to be influenced by the treatment under study (e.g., heart failure), the aim of adjudicating atherosclerotic outcomes should be to remove such events. Lastly, restrictive definitions for the remaining suspected atherosclerotic outcomes may reduce statistical power.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7614871
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76148712023-08-03 Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection Herrington, William G. Harper, Charlie Staplin, Natalie Haynes, Richard Emberson, Jonathan R. Reith, Christina Hooi, Lai Seong Levin, Adeera Wanner, Christoph Baigent, Colin Landray, Martin J. Kidney Int Rep Clinical Research INTRODUCTION: We aimed to assess opportunities for trial streamlining and the scientific impact of adjudication on kidney and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We analyzed the effects of adjudication of approximately 2100 maintenance kidney replacement therapy (KRT) and approximately 1300 major atherosclerotic events (MAEs) recorded in the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP). We first compared outcome classification before adjudication versus after adjudication, and then reran randomized comparisons using preadjudicated follow-up data. RESULTS: For maintenance KRT, adjudication had little impact with only 1% of events being refuted (28/2115). Consequently, randomized comparisons using preadjudication reports found almost identical results (preadjudication: simvastatin/ezetimibe 1038 vs. placebo 1077; rate ratio [RR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88–1.04; postadjudicated: 1057 vs. 1084; RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.89–1.05). For MAEs, about one-quarter of patient reports were refuted (324/1275 [25%]); and reviewing 3538 other potential vascular events and death reports identified only 194 additional MAEs. Nevertheless, randomized analyses using SHARP’s preadjudicated data alone found similar results to analyses based on adjudicated outcomes (preadjudication: 573 vs. 702; RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.72–0.89; adjudicated: 526 vs. 619; RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.74–0.94); and also suggested that refuted MAEs were likely to represent atherosclerotic disease (RR for refuted MAEs = 0.80, 95% CI 0.65–1.00). CONCLUSIONS: These analyses provide 3 key insights. First, they provide a rationale for nephrology trials not to adjudicate maintenance KRT. Second, when an event that mimics an atherosclerotic outcome is not expected to be influenced by the treatment under study (e.g., heart failure), the aim of adjudicating atherosclerotic outcomes should be to remove such events. Lastly, restrictive definitions for the remaining suspected atherosclerotic outcomes may reduce statistical power. Elsevier 2023-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7614871/ /pubmed/37538810 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ekir.2023.05.008 Text en © 2023 International Society of Nephrology. Published by Elsevier Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Clinical Research
Herrington, William G.
Harper, Charlie
Staplin, Natalie
Haynes, Richard
Emberson, Jonathan R.
Reith, Christina
Hooi, Lai Seong
Levin, Adeera
Wanner, Christoph
Baigent, Colin
Landray, Martin J.
Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection
title Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection
title_full Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection
title_fullStr Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection
title_short Impact of Outcome Adjudication in Kidney Disease Trials: Observations From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection
title_sort impact of outcome adjudication in kidney disease trials: observations from the study of heart and renal protection
topic Clinical Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7614871/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37538810
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ekir.2023.05.008
work_keys_str_mv AT herringtonwilliamg impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT harpercharlie impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT staplinnatalie impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT haynesrichard impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT embersonjonathanr impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT reithchristina impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT hooilaiseong impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT levinadeera impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT wannerchristoph impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT baigentcolin impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT landraymartinj impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection
AT impactofoutcomeadjudicationinkidneydiseasetrialsobservationsfromthestudyofheartandrenalprotection