Person:

Bourgeois, Florence

Background: The $1.1 billion investment in comparative effectiveness research will reshape the evidence-base supporting decisions about treatment effectiveness, safety, and cost. Defining the current prevalence and characteristics of comparative effectiveness (CE) research will enable future assessments of the impact of this program. Methods: We conducted an observational study of clinical trials addressing priority research topics defined by the Institute of Medicine and conducted in the US between 2007 and 2010. Trials were identified in ClinicalTrials.gov. Main outcome measures were the prevalence of comparative effectiveness research, nature of comparators selected, funding sources, and impact of these factors on results. Results: 231 (22.3%; 95% CI 19.8%–24.9%) studies were CE studies and 804 (77.7%; 95% CI, 75.1%–80.2%) were non-CE studies, with 379 (36.6%; 95% CI, 33.7%–39.6%) employing a placebo control and 425 (41.1%; 95% CI, 38.1%–44.1%) no control. The most common treatments examined in CE studies were drug interventions (37.2%), behavioral interventions (28.6%), and procedures (15.6%). Study findings were favorable for the experimental treatment in 34.8% of CE studies and greater than twice as many (78.6%) non-CE studies (P<0.001). CE studies were more likely to receive government funding (P = 0.003) and less likely to receive industry funding (P = 0.01), with 71.8% of CE studies primarily funded by a noncommercial source. The types of interventions studied differed based on funding source, with 95.4% of industry trials studying a drug or device. In addition, industry-funded CE studies were associated with the fewest pediatric subjects (P<0.001), the largest anticipated sample size (P<0.001), and the shortest study duration (P<0.001). Conclusions: In this sample of studies examining high priority areas for CE research, less than a quarter are CE studies and the majority is supported by government and nonprofits. The low prevalence of CE research exists across CE studies with a broad array of interventions and characteristics.

Pediatric populations continue to be understudied in clinical drug trials despite the increasing use of pharmacotherapy in children, particularly with psychotropic drugs. Most pertinent to the clinical selection of drug interventions are trials directly comparing drugs against other drugs. The aim was to measure the prevalence of active drug comparators in neuropsychiatric drug trials in children and identify the effects of funding source on comparator selection. We analyzed the selection of drugs and drug comparisons in clinical trials registered between January 2006 and May 2012. Completed and ongoing interventional trials examining treatments for six neuropsychiatric conditions in children were included. Networks of drug comparisons for each condition were constructed using information about the trial study arms. Of 421 eligible trial registrations, 228 (63,699 participants) were drug trials addressing ADHD (106 trials), autism spectrum disorders (47), unipolar depression (16), seizure disorders (38), migraines and other headaches (15), or schizophrenia (11). Active drug comparators were used in only 11.0% of drug trials while 44.7% used a placebo control and 44.3% no drug or placebo comparator. Even among conditions with well-established pharmacotherapeutic options, almost all drug interventions were compared to a placebo. Active comparisons were more common among trials without industry funding (17% vs. 8%, p=0.04). Trials with industry funding differed from non-industry trials in terms of the drugs studied and the comparators selected. For 73% (61/84) of drugs and 90% (19/21) of unique comparisons, trials were funded exclusively by either industry or non-industry. We found that industry and non-industry differed when choosing comparators and active drug comparators were rare for both groups. This gap in pediatric research activity limits the evidence available to clinicians treating children and suggests a need to reassess the design and funding of pediatric trials in order to optimize the information derived from pediatric participation in clinical trials.

Background: Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a chronic condition and pharmacotherapy is the mainstay of treatment, with a variety of ADHD medications available to patients. However, it is unclear to what extent the long-term safety and efficacy of ADHD drugs have been evaluated prior to their market authorization. We aimed to quantify the number of participants studied and their length of exposure in ADHD drug trials prior to marketing. Methods: We identified all ADHD medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and extracted data on clinical trials performed by the sponsor and used by the FDA to evaluate the drug’s clinical efficacy and safety. For each ADHD medication, we measured the total number of participants studied and the length of participant exposure and identified any FDA requests for post-marketing trials. Results: A total of 32 clinical trials were conducted for the approval of 20 ADHD drugs. The median number of participants studied per drug was 75 (IQR 0, 419). Eleven drugs (55%) were approved after <100 participants were studied and 14 (70%) after <300 participants. The median trial length prior to approval was 4 weeks (IQR 2, 9), with 5 (38%) drugs approved after participants were studied <4 weeks and 10 (77%) after <6 months. Six drugs were approved with requests for specific additional post-marketing trials, of which 2 were performed. Conclusions: Clinical trials conducted for the approval of many ADHD drugs have not been designed to assess rare adverse events or long-term safety and efficacy. While post-marketing studies can fill in some of the gaps, better assurance is needed that the proper trials are conducted either before or after a new medication is approved.

Background: Personally controlled health records (PCHRs) are accessible over the Internet and allow individuals to maintain and manage a secure copy of their medical data. These records provide a new opportunity to provide customized health recommendations to individuals based on their record content. Health promotion programs using PCHRs can potentially be used in a variety of settings and target a large range of health issues. Objectives: The aim was to assess the value of a PCHR in an employee health promotion program for improving knowledge, beliefs, and behavior around influenza prevention. Methods: We evaluated a PCHR-based employee health promotion program using a randomized controlled trial design. Employees at Hewlett Packard work sites who reported reliable Internet access and email use at least once every 2 days were recruited for participation. PCHRs were provided to all participants for survey administration, and tailored, targeted health messages on influenza illness and prevention were delivered to participants in the intervention group. Participants in the control group received messages addressing cardiovascular health and sun protection. The main outcome measure was improvement in knowledge, beliefs, and behavior around influenza prevention. Secondary outcomes were influenza vaccine rates among household members, the impact of cardiovascular health and sun protection messages on the control group, and the usability and utility of the PCHR-based program for employees. Results: The intervention did not have a statistically significant effect on the influenza knowledge elements we assessed but did impact certain beliefs surrounding influenza. Participants in the intervention group were more likely to believe that the influenza vaccine was effective (OR = 5.6; 95% CI = 1.7-18.5), that there were actions they could take to prevent the flu (OR = 3.2; 95% CI = 1.1-9.2), and that the influenza vaccine was unlikely to cause a severe reaction (OR = 4.4; 95% CI = 1.3-15.3). Immunization rates did not differ between the intervention and control groups. However, participants in the intervention group were more likely to stay home during an infectious respiratory illness compared with participants in the control group (39% [16/41] vs 14% [5/35], respectively; P = .02). The program also succeeded in improving recognition of the signs of heart attack and stroke among participants in the control group. Overall, 78% of participants rated the PCHR as “extremely/very” easy to use, and 73% responded that they would be “extremely/very” likely to participate again in a PCHR-based health promotion system such as this one. Conclusions: With a small sample size, this study identified a modest impact of a PCHR-based employee health program on influenza prevention and control. Employees found the PCHR acceptable and easy to use, suggesting that it should be explored as a common medium for health promotion in the workplace.

Objectives: To identify patient, provider, and hospital characteristics associated with the use of neuroimaging in the evaluation of head trauma in children. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of children (≤19 years of age) with head injuries from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. NHAMCS collects data on approximately 25,000 visits annually to 600 randomly selected hospital emergency and outpatient departments. This study examined visits to U.S. emergency departments between 2002 and 2006. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze characteristics associated with neuroimaging in children with head injuries. Results: There were 50,835 pediatric visits in the 5 year sample, of which 1,256 (2.5%, 95% CI = 2.2% to 2.7%) were for head injury. Among these, 39% (95% CI = 34% to 43%) underwent evaluation with neuroimaging. In multivariable analyses, factors associated with neuroimaging included white race (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, 95% CI = 1.02 to 2.1), older age (OR 1.3, 95% CI = 1.1 to 1.5), presentation to a general hospital (vs. a pediatric hospital, OR 2.4, 95% CI = 1.1 to 5.3), more emergent triage status (OR 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1 to 1.8), admission or transfer (OR 2.7, 95% CI = 1.4 to 5.3), and treatment by an attending physician (OR 2.0, 95% CI = 1.1 to 3.7). The effect of race was mitigated at the pediatric hospitals compared to at the general hospitals (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this study, patient race, age, and hospital-specific characteristics were associated with the frequency of neuroimaging in the evaluation of children with closed head injuries. Based on these results, focusing quality improvement initiatives on physicians at general hospitals may be an effective approach to decreasing rates of neuroimaging after pediatric head trauma.

Purpose: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a common complication of medical care resulting in high morbidity and medical expenditure. Population level estimates of outpatient ADEs are limited. Our objective was to provide national estimates and characterizations of outpatient ADEs and determine risk factors associated with these events. Methods: Data are from the National Center for Health Statistics which collects information on patient visits to outpatient clinics and emergency departments throughout the United States. We examined visits between 1995 and 2005 and measured the national annual estimates of and risk factors for outpatient ADEs requiring medical treatment. Results: The national annual number of ADE-related visits was 4,335,990 (95%CI, 4,326,872–4,345,108). Visits for ADEs to outpatient clinics increased over the study period from 9.0 to 17.0 per 1000 persons (P value for trend<0.001). In multivariate analyses, factors associated with ADE visits included patient age (OR 2.13; 95%CI 1.63–2.79 for 65 years and older), number of medications taken by patient (OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.58–2.25 for five medications or more), and female gender (OR, 1.51; 95%CI, 1.34–1.71). Overall, outpatient ADEs resulted in 107,468 (95%CI, 89,011–125,925) hospital admissions annually, with older patients at highest risk for hospitalization (P value for trend<0.001). Conclusions: Both patient age and polypharmacy use are risk factors for ADE-related healthcare visits, which have substantially increased in outpatient clinics between 1995 and 2005. The incidence of ADEs has particularly increased among patients 65 years and older with as many as 1 in 20 persons seeking medical care for an ADE.

Background: Clinical trial registries are in widespread use to promote transparency around trials and their results. Objective: To describe characteristics of drug trials listed in ClinicalTrials.gov and examine whether the funding source of these trials is associated with favorable published outcomes. Design: An observational study of safety and efficacy trials for anticholesteremics, antidepressants, antipsychotics, proton-pump inhibitors, and vasodilators conducted between 2000 and 2006. Setting: ClinicalTrials.gov, a Web-based registry of clinical trials launched in 1999. Measurements: Publications resulting from the trials for the 5 drug categories of interest were identified, and data were abstracted on the trial record and publication, including timing of registration, elements of the study design, funding source, publication date, and study outcomes. Assessments were based on the primary funding categories of industry, government agencies, and nonprofit or nonfederal organizations. Results: Among 546 drug trials, 346 (63%) were primarily funded by industry, 74 (14%) by government sources, and 126 (23%) by nonprofit or nonfederal organizations. Trials funded by industry were more likely to be phase 3 or 4 trials (88.7%; P < 0.001 across groups), to use an active comparator in controlled trials (36.8%; P = 0.010 across groups), to be multicenter (89.0%; P < 0.001 across groups), and to enroll more participants (median sample size, 306 participants; P < 0.001 across groups). Overall, 362 (66.3%) trials had published results. Industry-funded trials reported positive outcomes in 85.4% of publications, compared with 50.0% for government-funded trials and 71.9% for nonprofit or nonfederal organization–funded trials (P < 0.001). Trials funded by nonprofit or nonfederal sources with industry contributions were also more likely to report positive outcomes than those without industry funding (85.0% vs. 61.2%; P = 0.013). Rates of trial publication within 24 months of study completion ranged from 32.4% among industry-funded trials to 56.2% among nonprofit or nonfederal organization–funded trials without industry contributions (P = 0.005 across groups). Limitations: The publication status of a trial could not always be confirmed, which could result in misclassification. Additional information on study protocols and comprehensive trial results were not available to further explore underlying factors for the association between funding source and outcome reporting. Conclusion: In this sample of registered drug trials, those funded by industry were less likely to be published within 2 years of study completion and were more likely to report positive outcomes than were trials funded by other sources.

Objectives: To identify patient and hospital characteristics associated with the use of computed tomography (CT) imaging of the cervical spine (c-spine) in the evaluation of injured children and, in particular, to examine the influence of hospital setting. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort of children younger than 19 years of age from the Massachusetts Hospital Emergency Department (ED) database who were discharged from the ED with an injury diagnosis from 2005 through 2009. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze characteristics associated with CT imaging of the c-spine. Results: Of the 929,626 pediatric patients diagnosed with an injury in Massachusetts EDs and then discharged home, 1.3% underwent CT imaging of the c-spine. Rates of CT imaging nearly doubled over the five years. In the multivariable model, patient age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.0 to 2.7 for children age 12 to 18 years vs. under 1 year of age), and evaluation outside of a pediatric Level I trauma center (AOR 2.2, 95% CI = 1.1 to 4.3 for children evaluated at non Level I trauma centers vs. pediatric Level I trauma centers; AOR 2.1, 95% CI = 0.93 to 4.7 for children evaluated at adult Level I trauma centers vs. pediatric Level I trauma centers) were associated with higher rates of CT imaging of the c-spine. Conclusions: C-spine CT imaging for children discharged from the ED with trauma diagnoses increased from 2005 through 2009. Older age and evaluation outside a Level I pediatric trauma center were associated with a higher c-spine CT rate. Educational interventions focused outside pediatric trauma centers may be an effective approach to decreasing CT imaging of the c-spine of pediatric trauma patients.

Purpose: Physicians require information on the comparative benefits and harms of medications for optimal treatment decisions. However, this type of data is limited, especially for pediatric patients. Objective: Our aim was to use observational data to measure and compare medication utilization patterns in a pediatric patient population. Methods: Using pharmacy claims data from a large, national-scale insurance program in the US, we identified all patients with a diagnosis of epilepsy treated with a first-generation (carabamazepine, ethosuximide, phenobarbital, phenytoin, valproate) or second-generation (carbamazepine XR, gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, tiagabine, topiramate, valproate XR, zonisamide) antiepileptic drug. Treatment periods were defined based on prescription fill dates and medication days supplied. Medication use was measured for individual antiepileptic drugs and for first-generation and second-generation drugs as groups. Results: There were 2527 (54%) patients who initiated therapy with first-generation and 2139 (46%) with second-generation antiepileptics. First- and second-generation drugs had the same one-year retention rates (26% [95%CI 24–28] and 26% [95%CI 25–28], respectively). A total of 26% (95%CI 25–28) and 29% (95%CI 27–31) of patients who started on a first- or second-generation antiepileptic medication, respectively, resumed treatment with the initial drug after discontinuation. Overall, 73% (95%CI 71–74) of patients were treated with only one antiepileptic drug, with similar rates for patients started on first- and second-generation drugs (71% [95%CI 69–73] vs 74% [95%CI 72–76]). Conclusions: Comparing drug utilization patterns in a pediatric population using observational data, we found similar rates of retention and therapeutic changes. These findings are consistent with available comparative data and demonstrate an approach that could be extended to other drug classes and conditions in pediatric populations to examine drug effectiveness.

In light of a number of recent drug development and marketing controversies, there is increasing public focus on the role of industry in determining how drugs are used.1–3 New methods that evaluate how funding has influenced the design, reporting, and synthesis of evidence from clinical trials have identified the breadth of industry involvement in evidence production. The downstream effects on public health remain difficult to quantify. In order to identify and mitigate the potential effects of any one type of trial sponsor, we argue that these new methods should now be used routinely and systematically, in a process we call evidence surveillance.