Use of pragmatic randomized trials in multiple sclerosis: A systematic overview

Author:

Hirt Julian1ORCID,Janiaud Perrine2,Düblin Pascal3,Nicoletti Giovanni Jacopo4,Dembowska Kinga5,Nguyen Thao Vy Thi5,Woelfle Tim6ORCID,Axfors Cathrine2,Yaldizli Özgür2,Granziera Cristina2ORCID,Kuhle Jens2,Kappos Ludwig2ORCID,Hemkens Lars G2

Affiliation:

1. Research Center for Clinical Neuroimmunology and Neuroscience Basel (RC2NB), University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland/Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland/Department of Health, Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences, St. Gallen, Switzerland

2. Research Center for Clinical Neuroimmunology and Neuroscience Basel (RC2NB), University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland/Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

3. Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

4. Department of Emergency Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland

5. Research Center for Clinical Neuroimmunology and Neuroscience Basel (RC2NB), University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland/MSc program in epidemiology, Swiss TPH, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

6. Research Center for Clinical Neuroimmunology and Neuroscience Basel (RC2NB), University Hospital Basel and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

Abstract

Background: Pragmatic trials are increasingly recognized for providing real-world evidence on treatment choices. Objective: The objective of this study is to investigate the use and characteristics of pragmatic trials in multiple sclerosis (MS). Methods: Systematic literature search and analysis of pragmatic trials on any intervention published up to 2022. The assessment of pragmatism with PRECIS-2 (PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2) is performed. Results: We identified 48 pragmatic trials published 1967–2022 that included a median of 82 participants (interquartile range (IQR) = 42–160) to assess typically supportive care interventions ( n = 41; 85%). Only seven trials assessed drugs (15%). Only three trials (6%) included >500 participants. Trials were mostly from the United Kingdom ( n = 18; 38%), Italy ( n = 6; 13%), the United States and Denmark (each n = 5; 10%). Primary outcomes were diverse, for example, quality-of-life, physical functioning, or disease activity. Only 1 trial (2%) used routinely collected data for outcome ascertainment. No trial was very pragmatic in all design aspects, but 14 trials (29%) were widely pragmatic (i.e. PRECIS-2 score ⩾ 4/5 in all domains). Conclusion: Only few and mostly small pragmatic trials exist in MS which rarely assess drugs. Despite the widely available routine data infrastructures, very few trials utilize them. There is an urgent need to leverage the potential of this pioneering study design to provide useful randomized real-world evidence.

Funder

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Neurology

Reference78 articles.

1. Zwarenstein M. “Pragmatic” and “Explanatory” attitudes to randomized trials. JLL Bulletin, 2016, https://www.jameslindlibrary.org/articles/pragmatic-and-explanatory-attitudes-to-randomized-trials/ (2016, accessed 24 September 2023).

2. Food Drug Administration (FDA). Framework for FDA’s Real-World Evidence Program, https://www.fda.gov/media/120060/download (2018, accessed 24 September 2023).

3. Routinely collected data and comparative effectiveness evidence: promises and limitations

4. Routinely collected data for randomized trials: promises, barriers, and implications

5. ISIS-2: 10 year survival among patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction in randomised comparison of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3