Reporting of intention-to-treat analyses in recent analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review and recommendations

Pain

Volumn 155, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 2714-2719

  Gewandter, Jennifer S ^a   McDermott, Michael P ^a   McKeown, Andrew ^a   Smith, Shannon M ^a   Pawlowski, Joseph R ^a   Poli, Joseph J ^a   Rothstein, Daniel ^a   Williams, Mark R ^a   Bujanover, Shay ^b   Farrar, John T ^c   Gilron, Ian ^d   Katz, Nathaniel P ^e,f   Rowbotham, Michael C ^g   Turk, Dennis C ^h   Dworkin, Robert H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY   (United States)

^b Depomed Inc   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e Analgesic Solutions   (United States)

^f TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

ACTTION; Intention to treat; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

ANALGESIC AGENT;

ARTICLE; HUMAN; IMPLANTABLE PUMP; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NERVE BLOCK; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; PAIN; PHARMACEUTICAL CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SPINAL CORD STIMULATOR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); PUBLISHING; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ANALGESICS; HUMANS; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; PAIN; PUBLISHING;

EID: 84922758028     PISSN: 03043959     EISSN: 18726623     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2014.09.039     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Adetugbo K, Williams H. How well are randomized controlled trials reported in the dermatology literature? Arch Dermatol 2000;136:381-5.
2. Alshurafa M, Briel M, Akl EA, Haines T, Moayyedi P, Gentles SJ, Rios L, Tran C, Bhatnagar N, Lamontagne F, Walter SD, Guyatt GH. Inconsistent definitions for intention-to-treat in relation to missing outcome data: systematic review of the methods literature. PLoS One 2012;7:e49163.
3. Angrist JD, Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables (with Discussion and Rejoinder). J Am Stat Assoc 1996;91:444-72.
4. Baron G, Boutron I, Giraudeau B, Ravaud P. Violation of the intent-to-treat principle and rate of missing data in superiority trials assessing structural outcomes in rheumatic diseases. Arthritis Rheum 2005;52:1858-65.
5. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, Pitkin R, Rennie D, Schulz KF, Simel D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT Statement. JAMA 1996;276:637-9.
6. Begg CB. Ruminations on the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:241-3.
7. ® 2013;154:2249-61.
8. Fisher LD, Dixon DO, Herson J, Frankowski RK, Hearron MS, Peace KE. Intention to treat in clinical trials. In: American Statistical Associations Group, editor. Statistical issues in drug research and development. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1990. p. 331-50.
9. Frangakis CE, Rubin DB. Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics 2002;58:21-9.
10. ® 2014;155:1683-95.
11. ® 2014;155:1871-7.
12. ® 2014;155:461-6.
13. Gibbons RD, Hedeker D, Elkin I, Waternaux C, Kraemer HC, Greenhouse JB, Shea MT, Imber SD, Sotsky SM, Watkins JT. Some conceptual and statistical issues in analysis of longitudinal psychiatric data. Application to the NIMH treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program dataset. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1993;50:739-50.
14. Gravel J, Opatrny L, Shapiro S. The intention-to-treat approach in randomized controlled trials: are authors saying what they do and doing what they say? Clin Trials 2007;4:350-6.
15. Herman A, Botser IB, Tenenbaum S, Chechick A. Intention-to-treat analysis and accounting for missing data in orthopaedic randomized clinical trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009;91:2137-43.
16. Hernan MA, Hernandez-Diaz S. Beyond the intention-to-treat in comparative effectiveness research. Clin Trials 2012;9:48-55.
17. Heyting A, Tolboom JT, Essers JG. Statistical handling of drop-outs in longitudinal clinical trials. Stat Med 1992;11:2043-61.
18. Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999;319:670-4.
19. Kruse RL, Alper BS, Reust C, Stevermer JJ, Shannon S, Williams RH. Intention-to-treat analysis: who is in? Who is out? J Fam Pract 2002;51:969-71.
20. Lee YJ, Ellenberg JH, Hirtz DG, Nelson KB. Analysis of clinical trials by treatment actually received: is it really an option? Stat Med 1991;10:1595-605.
21. Little RJ, Long Q, Lin X. A comparison of methods for estimating the causal effect of a treatment in randomized clinical trials subject to noncompliance. Biometrics 2009;65:640-9.
22. Little RJ, D'Agostino R, Cohen ML, Dickersin K, Emerson SS, Farrar JT, Frangakis C, Hogan JW, Molenberghs G, Murphy SA, Neaton JD, Rotnitzky A, Scharfstein D, Shih WJ, Siegel JP, Stern H. The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1355-60.
23. Mills EJ, Wu P, Gagnier J, Devereaux PJ. The quality of randomized trial reporting in leading medical journals since the revised CONSORT statement. Contemp Clin Trials 2005;26:480-7.
24. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:c869.
25. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:657-62.
26. Molenberghs G, Kenward MG. Missing data in clinical studies. Chichester, UK: Wiley; 2007.
27. Montedori A, Bonacini MI, Casazza G, Luchetta ML, Duca P, Cozzolino F, Abraha I. Modified versus standard intention-to-treat reporting: are there differences in methodological quality, sponsorship, and findings in randomized trials? A cross-sectional study. Trials 2011;12:58.
28. Nuesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AW, Burgi E, Scherer M, Altman DG, Juni P. The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 2009;339:b3244.
29. O'Neill RT, Temple R. The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials: an FDA perspective on the importance of dealing with it. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2012;91:550-4.
30. Pagoto SL, Kozak AT, John P, Bodenlos JS, Hedeker D, Spring B, Schneider KL. Intention-to-treat analyses in behavioral medicine randomized clinical trials. Int J Behav Med 2009;16:316-22.
31. Pengel LH, Barcena L, Morris PJ. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in solid organ transplantation. Transpl Int 2009;22:377-84.
32. Polit DF, Gillespie BM. The use of the intention-to-treat principle in nursing clinical trials. Nurs Res 2009;58:391-9.
33. Rowbotham MC, Twilling L, Davies PS, Reisner L, Taylor K, Mohr D. Oral opioid therapy for chronic peripheral and central neuropathic pain. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1223-32.
34. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis 1967;20:637-48.
35. Sheiner LB. Is intent-to-treat analysis always (ever) enough? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002;54:203-11.
36. Sheiner LB, Rubin DB. Intention-to-treat analysis and the goals of clinical trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1995;57:6-15.
37. Siddiqui O, Ali MW. A comparison of the random-effects pattern mixture model with last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) analysis in longitudinal clinical trials with dropouts. J Biopharm Stat 1998;8:545-63.
38. Toulmonde M, Bellera C, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Debled M, Bui B, Italiano A. Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the treatment of sarcomas. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:1204-9.
39. US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration. Guideline for the format and content of the clinical and statistical sections of new drug applications, available at: ; 1988 [Accessed 07.04.14].
40. Wang JL, Sun TT, Lin YW, Lu R, Fang JY. Methodological reporting of randomized controlled trials in major hepato-gastroenterology journals in 2008 and 1998: a comparative study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011;11:110.