Two Decades of Cardiovascular Trials With Primary Surrogate Endpoints: 1990–2011

Author:

Bikdeli Behnood12,Punnanithinont Natdanai3,Akram Yasir4,Lee Ike5,Desai Nihar R.16,Ross Joseph S.178910,Krumholz Harlan M.16810

Affiliation:

1. Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale New Haven Health, New Haven, CT

2. Division of Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center New York‐Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY

3. University at Buffalo, NY

4. Saint Vincent Hospital, Worcester, MA

5. Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT

6. Section of Cardiovascular Medicine Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT

7. Section of General Internal Medicine Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT

8. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clnical Scholars Program Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT

9. Department of Internal Medicine Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT

10. Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT

Abstract

Background Surrogate endpoint trials test strategies more efficiently but are accompanied by uncertainty about the relationship between changes in surrogate markers and clinical outcomes. Methods and Results We identified cardiovascular trials with primary surrogate endpoints published in the New England Journal of Medicine , Lancet , and JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association from 1990 to 2011 and determined the trends in publication of surrogate endpoint trials and the success of the trials in meeting their primary endpoints. We tracked for publication of clinical outcome trials on the interventions tested in surrogate trials. We screened 3016 articles and identified 220 surrogate endpoint trials. From the total of 220 surrogate trials, 157 (71.4%) were positive for their primary endpoint. Only 59 (26.8%) surrogate trials had a subsequent clinical outcomes trial. Among these 59 trials, 24 outcomes trial results validated the positive surrogates, whereas 20 subsequent outcome trials were negative following positive results on a surrogate. We identified only 3 examples in which the surrogate trial was negative but a subsequent outcomes trial was conducted and showed benefit. Findings were consistent in a sample cohort of 383 screened articles inclusive of 37 surrogate endpoint trials from 6 other high‐impact journals. Conclusions Although cardiovascular surrogate outcomes trials frequently show superiority of the tested intervention, they are infrequently followed by a prominent outcomes trial. When there was a high‐profile clinical outcomes study, nearly half of the positive surrogate trials were not validated. Cardiovascular surrogate outcome trials may be more appropriate for excluding benefit from the patient perspective than for identifying it.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

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