Randomization in clinical trials of titrated therapies: Unintended consequences of using fixed treatment protocols

Katherine J. Deans, Peter C. Minneci, Anthony F. Suffredini, Robert L. Danner, William D. Hoffman, Xizhong Ciu, Harvey G. Klein, Alan N. Schechter, Steven M. Banks, Peter Q. Eichacker, Charles Natanson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Clinical trial designs that randomize patients to fixed treatment regimens may disrupt preexisting relationships between illness severity and level of therapy. The practice misalignments created by such designs may have unintended effects on trial results and safety. METHODS: To illustrate this problem, the Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care (TRICC) trial and the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network low tidal volume (ARMA) trial were analyzed. RESULTS: Publications before TRICC indicated that clinicians used higher transfusion thresholds in patients with ischemic heart disease compared with younger, healthier patients (p = .001). The trial, however, randomized patients (n = 838) to liberal (10 g/dL hemoglobin) or restrictive (7 g/dL) transfusion thresholds. Thirty-day mortality was different and opposite in the liberal compared with the restrictive arm depending on presence (21 vs. 26%) or absence (25 vs. 16%) of ischemic heart disease (p = .03). At baseline in ARMA, consistent with prior publications, physicians set ventilator volumes lower in patients with high airway pressures and poor compliance (8.4-10.6 mL/kg interquartile range) than patients with less severe abnormalities (9.6-12 mL/kg) (p = .0001). In the trial, however, patients (n = 861) were randomized to low (6 mL/kg) or high (12 mL/kg) tidal volumes. In patients with low compliance (

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1509-1516
Number of pages8
JournalCritical Care Medicine
Volume35
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Clinical Protocols
Random Allocation
Clinical Trials
Tidal Volume
Therapeutics
Critical Care
Myocardial Ischemia
Publications
Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Mechanical Ventilators
Compliance
Hemoglobins
Physicians
Safety
Pressure
Mortality

Keywords

  • Practice misalignment
  • Randomization
  • Treatment dose

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Deans, K. J., Minneci, P. C., Suffredini, A. F., Danner, R. L., Hoffman, W. D., Ciu, X., ... Natanson, C. (2007). Randomization in clinical trials of titrated therapies: Unintended consequences of using fixed treatment protocols. Critical Care Medicine, 35(6), 1509-1516. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000266584.40715.A6

Randomization in clinical trials of titrated therapies : Unintended consequences of using fixed treatment protocols. / Deans, Katherine J.; Minneci, Peter C.; Suffredini, Anthony F.; Danner, Robert L.; Hoffman, William D.; Ciu, Xizhong; Klein, Harvey G.; Schechter, Alan N.; Banks, Steven M.; Eichacker, Peter Q.; Natanson, Charles.

In: Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 35, No. 6, 06.2007, p. 1509-1516.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Deans, KJ, Minneci, PC, Suffredini, AF, Danner, RL, Hoffman, WD, Ciu, X, Klein, HG, Schechter, AN, Banks, SM, Eichacker, PQ & Natanson, C 2007, 'Randomization in clinical trials of titrated therapies: Unintended consequences of using fixed treatment protocols', Critical Care Medicine, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1509-1516. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000266584.40715.A6
Deans, Katherine J. ; Minneci, Peter C. ; Suffredini, Anthony F. ; Danner, Robert L. ; Hoffman, William D. ; Ciu, Xizhong ; Klein, Harvey G. ; Schechter, Alan N. ; Banks, Steven M. ; Eichacker, Peter Q. ; Natanson, Charles. / Randomization in clinical trials of titrated therapies : Unintended consequences of using fixed treatment protocols. In: Critical Care Medicine. 2007 ; Vol. 35, No. 6. pp. 1509-1516.
@article{00c4fb8d62c9428db885f774bdca0049,
title = "Randomization in clinical trials of titrated therapies: Unintended consequences of using fixed treatment protocols",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Clinical trial designs that randomize patients to fixed treatment regimens may disrupt preexisting relationships between illness severity and level of therapy. The practice misalignments created by such designs may have unintended effects on trial results and safety. METHODS: To illustrate this problem, the Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care (TRICC) trial and the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network low tidal volume (ARMA) trial were analyzed. RESULTS: Publications before TRICC indicated that clinicians used higher transfusion thresholds in patients with ischemic heart disease compared with younger, healthier patients (p = .001). The trial, however, randomized patients (n = 838) to liberal (10 g/dL hemoglobin) or restrictive (7 g/dL) transfusion thresholds. Thirty-day mortality was different and opposite in the liberal compared with the restrictive arm depending on presence (21 vs. 26{\%}) or absence (25 vs. 16{\%}) of ischemic heart disease (p = .03). At baseline in ARMA, consistent with prior publications, physicians set ventilator volumes lower in patients with high airway pressures and poor compliance (8.4-10.6 mL/kg interquartile range) than patients with less severe abnormalities (9.6-12 mL/kg) (p = .0001). In the trial, however, patients (n = 861) were randomized to low (6 mL/kg) or high (12 mL/kg) tidal volumes. In patients with low compliance (",
keywords = "Practice misalignment, Randomization, Treatment dose",
author = "Deans, {Katherine J.} and Minneci, {Peter C.} and Suffredini, {Anthony F.} and Danner, {Robert L.} and Hoffman, {William D.} and Xizhong Ciu and Klein, {Harvey G.} and Schechter, {Alan N.} and Banks, {Steven M.} and Eichacker, {Peter Q.} and Charles Natanson",
year = "2007",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1097/01.CCM.0000266584.40715.A6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "1509--1516",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomization in clinical trials of titrated therapies

T2 - Unintended consequences of using fixed treatment protocols

AU - Deans, Katherine J.

AU - Minneci, Peter C.

AU - Suffredini, Anthony F.

AU - Danner, Robert L.

AU - Hoffman, William D.

AU - Ciu, Xizhong

AU - Klein, Harvey G.

AU - Schechter, Alan N.

AU - Banks, Steven M.

AU - Eichacker, Peter Q.

AU - Natanson, Charles

PY - 2007/6

Y1 - 2007/6

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Clinical trial designs that randomize patients to fixed treatment regimens may disrupt preexisting relationships between illness severity and level of therapy. The practice misalignments created by such designs may have unintended effects on trial results and safety. METHODS: To illustrate this problem, the Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care (TRICC) trial and the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network low tidal volume (ARMA) trial were analyzed. RESULTS: Publications before TRICC indicated that clinicians used higher transfusion thresholds in patients with ischemic heart disease compared with younger, healthier patients (p = .001). The trial, however, randomized patients (n = 838) to liberal (10 g/dL hemoglobin) or restrictive (7 g/dL) transfusion thresholds. Thirty-day mortality was different and opposite in the liberal compared with the restrictive arm depending on presence (21 vs. 26%) or absence (25 vs. 16%) of ischemic heart disease (p = .03). At baseline in ARMA, consistent with prior publications, physicians set ventilator volumes lower in patients with high airway pressures and poor compliance (8.4-10.6 mL/kg interquartile range) than patients with less severe abnormalities (9.6-12 mL/kg) (p = .0001). In the trial, however, patients (n = 861) were randomized to low (6 mL/kg) or high (12 mL/kg) tidal volumes. In patients with low compliance (

AB - OBJECTIVE: Clinical trial designs that randomize patients to fixed treatment regimens may disrupt preexisting relationships between illness severity and level of therapy. The practice misalignments created by such designs may have unintended effects on trial results and safety. METHODS: To illustrate this problem, the Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care (TRICC) trial and the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network low tidal volume (ARMA) trial were analyzed. RESULTS: Publications before TRICC indicated that clinicians used higher transfusion thresholds in patients with ischemic heart disease compared with younger, healthier patients (p = .001). The trial, however, randomized patients (n = 838) to liberal (10 g/dL hemoglobin) or restrictive (7 g/dL) transfusion thresholds. Thirty-day mortality was different and opposite in the liberal compared with the restrictive arm depending on presence (21 vs. 26%) or absence (25 vs. 16%) of ischemic heart disease (p = .03). At baseline in ARMA, consistent with prior publications, physicians set ventilator volumes lower in patients with high airway pressures and poor compliance (8.4-10.6 mL/kg interquartile range) than patients with less severe abnormalities (9.6-12 mL/kg) (p = .0001). In the trial, however, patients (n = 861) were randomized to low (6 mL/kg) or high (12 mL/kg) tidal volumes. In patients with low compliance (

KW - Practice misalignment

KW - Randomization

KW - Treatment dose

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34249288679&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34249288679&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.CCM.0000266584.40715.A6

DO - 10.1097/01.CCM.0000266584.40715.A6

M3 - Article

C2 - 17440420

AN - SCOPUS:34249288679

VL - 35

SP - 1509

EP - 1516

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 6

ER -