Preview

Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology

Advanced search

Randomised Clinical Trials and Observational Studies: the Ratio in the Hierarchy of Evidence of the Efficacy of Drugs

https://doi.org/10.20996/1819-6446-2016-12-5-567-573

Full Text:

Abstract

The role of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in evaluation of the efficacy and safety of cardiology drugs is compared in the article. The clear conclusion is made that RCTs are the basis of modern evidence-based medicine, and that they have no alternative. Observational studies conducted in compliance with the modern rules can be a source of information on the efficacy of drugs only in the absence of data from RCTs.

About the Authors

S. Yu. Martsevich
State Research Center for Preventive Medicine. Petroverigsky per. 10-3, Moscow, 101990, Russia
Russian Federation

MD, PhD, Professor, Head of the Department of Preventive Pharmacotherapy, State Research Center for Preventive Medicine



N. P. Kutishenko
State Research Center for Preventive Medicine. Petroverigsky per. 10-3, Moscow, 101990, Russia
Russian Federation

MD, PhD, Head of Laboratory for Pharmacoepidemiological Research of the Department of Preventive Pharmacotherapy, State Research Center for Preventive Medicine



References

1. Lang GF. Diseases of the circulatory system. Moscow: Medgiz; 1957. (In Russian) [Ланг Г.Ф. Болезни системы кровообращения. М.: Медгиз; 1957].

2. Есht DS, Liebeson PR, Mitchell LB, et al. Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo: The Cardiac Arrhythmia Supression Trial. N Engl J Med. 1991; 324: 781-8. doi:10.1056/NEJM199103213241201.

3. Harris M, Taylor G, Jackson D. Clinical evidence made easy. Hockley, Essex: Scion Publishing Ltd; 2014.

4. Wang D, Bakhai A, eds. Clinical trials. A practical guide to design, analysis and reporting. London: Remedica Publishing; 2006.

5. Bønaa KH, Mannsverk J, Wiseth R, et al. Drug-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stents for Coronary Artery Disease. N Engl J Med. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1607991.

6. ISIS-4 (Fourth International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative. A randomised factorial trial assessing early oral captopril, oral mononitrate, and intravenous magnesium sulphate in 58050 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet. 1995; 345: 669-85.

7. MERIT-HF Study Group. Effect of metoprolol CR/XL in chronic heart failure: Metoprolol CR/XL Randomised Intervention Trial in Congestive Heart Failure (MERIT-HF). Lancet. 1999; 353: 2001–07. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04440-2.

8. Packer M, Poole-Wilson PA, Armstrong PW, et al. Comparative effects of low and high doses of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, lisinopril, on morbidity and mortality in chronic heart failure. Circulation. 1999;100:2312-8. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.100.23.2312.

9. Walker AM, Stampfer MJ. Observational studies of drug safety. Lancet. 1996; 348: 489. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)64664-8.

10. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz SJ, Ysuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361: 1139–51. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0905561.

11. Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365:883-91. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1009638.

12. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ, et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:981–92. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1107039.

13. Rawlins M. De testimonio: on the evidence for decisions about the use of therapeutic interventions. Lancet. 2008; 372: 2152-61. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61930-3.

14. Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P. When are randomized trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise. BMJ. 2007;334:349-51. doi:10.1136/bmj.39070.527986.68.

15. Glynn RJ, Schneeweiss S, Sturmer T. Indications for propensity scores and review of their use in pharmacoepidemiology. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2006; 98:253-9. doi:10.1111/j.1742-7843.2006.pto_293.x.

16. Normand SLT, Sykora K, Li P, et al. Aderson G.M. Readers guide to critical appraisal of cohort studies: 3. Analytical strategies to reduce confounding. BMJ. 2005; 330: 1021-3. doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7498.1021.

17. Larsen TB, Skjoth F, Nielsen PB, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonists oral anticoagulants and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: propensity weighted cohort study. BMJ. 2016;353:i3189. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.015710.

18. MacMahon M, Collins R. Reliable assessment of the effects of treatment on mortality and major morbidity, II: observational studies. Lancet. 2001;357:455-62. doi:10.1016/S0140- 6736(00)04017- 4.

19. Gliklich RE, Dreyer NA, eds. Registries for evaluating patient outcomes: a user’s guide. 2nd ed. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2010.

20. Martsevich SY, Navasardyan AR, Zakharova NA, Lukyanov MM. New oral anticoagulants: whether the results of the international well-controlled studies with these drugs carry on Russian patients? Kardiovaskulyarnaya Terapiya i Profilaktika 2015; 14 (5): 48-52. (IN Russian) [Марцевич С.Ю., Навасардян А.Р., Захарова Н.А., Лукьянов М.М. Новые оральные антикоагулянты: можно ли результаты международных контролируемых исследований с этими препаратами переносить на российских больных? Кардиоваскулярная Терапия и Профилактика 2015; 14(5): 48-52].

21. Bangalore S, Steg PG, Deedwania P, et al. β-Blocker Use and Clinical Outcomes in Stable Outpatients With and Without Coronary Artery Disease. JAMA. 2012;308:1340-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.12559.

22. Collins R, MacMahon M. Reliable assessment of the effects of treatment on mortality and major morbidity, I: clinical trials. Lancet. 2001; 357: 373-80. doi:10.1016/S0140- 6736(00)03651-5.


For citation:


Martsevich S.Y., Kutishenko N.P. Randomised Clinical Trials and Observational Studies: the Ratio in the Hierarchy of Evidence of the Efficacy of Drugs. Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology. 2016;12(5):567-573. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20996/1819-6446-2016-12-5-567-573

Views: 380


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1819-6446 (Print)
ISSN 2225-3653 (Online)