How to read a published clinical trial: a practical guide for clinicians

Mohamad B Sonbol; Belal M Firwana; Talal Hilal; Mohammad Hassan Murad

doi:10.4103/ajm.ajm_186_19

Avicenna Journal of Medicine, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Avicenna J Med 2020; 10(02): 68-75
DOI: 10.4103/ajm.ajm_186_19

Original Article

How to read a published clinical trial: a practical guide for clinicians

Mohamad B Sonbol

Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Phoenix, Arizona

,

Belal M Firwana

Heartland Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Missouri Baptist Medical Center, St. Louis, Missouri

,

Talal Hilal

University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi

,

Mohammad Hassan Murad

Evidence-Based Practice Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

› Author Affiliations
Subject Editor:

Abstract

Over the last 5 years, there have been more than 140 new drug approvals in the field of Oncology alone, all based on newly published clinical trials. These approvals have led to an ongoing change in clinical practice, offering new therapeutic options for patients. Therefore, it is important for healthcare providers to be able to appraise a clinical trial and determine its validity, understand its results, and be able to apply such results to their patients. In this guide, we provide a simplified approach tailored to practicing clinicians and trainees. The same concepts and principles apply to other medical specialties.

Keywords

Apixaban - apixaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism - critical appraisal - evidence-based medicine - evidence-based practice - randomized-clinical trials

Full Text

References

References
1 Hilal T, Sonbol MB, Prasad V. Analysis of control arm quality in randomized clinical trials leading to anticancer drug approval by the US food and drug administration. JAMA Oncol 2019; 5: 887-92
2 Guyatt G, Rennie D, Meade MO, Cook DJ. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill;
3 Khorana AA, Kuderer NM, Culakova E, Lyman GH, Francis CW. Development and validation of a predictive model for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis. Blood 2008; 111: 4902-7
4 Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, Alahdab F. New evidence pyramid. Evid Based Med 2016; 21: 125-7
5 Akobeng AK. Principles of evidence based medicine. Arch Dis Child 2005; 90: 837-40
6 Prasad K. Fundamentals of Evidence Based Medicine. India: Springer; 2014
7 Carrier M, Abou-Nassar K, Mallick R, Tagalakis V, Shivakumar S, Schattner A. et al AVERT Investigators. Apixaban to prevent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 711-9
8 Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. USA: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011
9 Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 2001; 323: 42-6
10 Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Altman DG. The landscape and lexicon of blinding in randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 254-9
11 Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995; 273: 408-12
12 Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Generation of allocation sequences in randomised trials: Chance, not choice. Lancet 2002; 359: 515-9
13 Primrose JN, Fox RP, Palmer DH, Malik HZ, Prasad R, Mirza D. et al BILCAP study group. Capecitabine compared with observation in resected biliary tract cancer (BILCAP): A randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 663-73
14 Karanicolas PJ, Farrokhyar F, Bhandari M. Practical tips for surgical research: Blinding: Who, what, when, why, how?. Can J Surg 2010; 53: 345-8
15 Hróbjartsson A, Emanuelsson F, Skou Thomsen AS, Hilden J, Brorson S. Bias due to lack of patient blinding in clinical trials. A systematic review of trials randomizing patients to blind and nonblind sub-studies. Int J Epidemiol 2014; 43: 1272-83
16 Nüesch E, Reichenbach S, Trelle S, Rutjes AW, Liewald K, Sterchi R. et al. The importance of allocation concealment and patient blinding in osteoarthritis trials: A meta-epidemiologic study. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 61: 1633-41
17 Meng Z, Garcia MK, Hu C, Chiang J, Chambers M, Rosenthal DI. et al. Randomized controlled trial of acupuncture for prevention of radiation-induced xerostomia among patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer 2012; 118: 3337-44
18 Madsen MV, Gøtzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A. Acupuncture treatment for pain: Systematic review of randomised clinical trials with acupuncture, placebo acupuncture, and no acupuncture groups. BMJ 2009; 338: a3115
19 Devereaux PJ, Bhandari M, Montori VM, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Guyatt GH. Double blind, you are the weakest link––good-bye!. ACP J Club 2002; 136: A11
20 Greer JA, Amoyal N, Nisotel L, Fishbein JN, MacDonald J, Stagl J. et al. A systematic review of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies. Oncologist 2016; 21: 354-76
21 Higgins JPT, Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Hróbjartsson A, Boutron I. et al. A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. Cochrane Methods. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 10: 29-31
22 Abraha I, Montedori A. Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: Systematic review. BMJ 2010; 340: c2697
23 Beckett RD, Loeser KC, Bowman KR, Towne TG. Intention-to-treat and transparency of related practices in randomized, controlled trials of anti-infectives. BMC Med Res Methodol 2016; 16: 106
24 Page MJ, Higgins JP, Clayton G, Sterne JA, Hróbjartsson A, Savović J. Empirical evidence of study design biases in randomized trials: Systematic review of meta-epidemiological studies. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0159267
25 Gandhi L, Rodríguez-Abreu D, Gadgeel S, Esteban E, Felip E, De Angelis F. et al KEYNOTE-189 Investigators. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2018; 378: 2078-92
26 Murad MH, Montori VM, Walter SD, Guyatt GH. Estimating risk difference from relative association measures in meta-analysis can infrequently pose interpretational challenges. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 865-7
27 Alahdab F, Haydour Q, Murad MH. Teaching tips: Explaining hazard ratios. In: Newsletter of the International Society for Evidence-Based Health Care. Busse Jason, Glasziou Paul, Guyatt Gordon. editors 13. 2013
28 Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, Figer A, Hecht JR, Gallinger S. et al National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: A phase III trial of the national cancer institute of Canada clinical trials group. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 1960-6
29 Murad MH, Katabi A, Benkhadra R, Montori VM. External validity, generalisability, applicability and directness: A brief primer. BMJ Evid Based Med 2018; 23: 17-9
30 Sakuramoto S, Sasako M, Yamaguchi T, Kinoshita T, Fujii M, Nashimoto A. et al ACTS-GC Group. Adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer with S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 1810-20