Cited by 4Ethics in Clinical ResearchStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies

Control treatments in biologics trials of rheumatoid arthritis were often not deemed acceptable in the context of care

Estellat, Candice, Tubach, Florence, Seror, Raphaèle, Alfaiate, Toni, Hajage, David, De Rycke, Yann, Ravaud, Philippe·2016·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Abstract

Objectives Control treatments in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should not deliberately disadvantage patients. The objectives of the study were to compare (1) willingness to include vs. (2) willingness to prescribe control treatment among physicians randomized to assess, respectively, either (1) enrollment in a trial or (2) appropriateness of control treatment in a care context for the same fictional patient.Study design and setting Physicians were authors of articles about rheumatoid arthritis (RA), involved in RA patient care, and used to enrolling patients in trials. The outcomes were willingness to give control treatment: trial enrollment or control-treatment appropriateness in care context. We derived three case vignettes of fictional standard eligible patients for each of 30 RCTs assessing biologics in RA. Physicians were randomly allocated to the "trial" or "care" arm. For each of the 90 fictional patients, physicians assigned to the trial arm were asked if they would enroll the patient in the RCT the patient was derived from. For the same 90 fictional patients, physicians assigned to the care arm were asked if the control treatment of the RCT was appropriate in a context of usual care.Results Of the 1,779 physicians invited to participate, 151 were randomized. Half of the fictional patients {41/90; 45% [95% confidence interval (CI): 37%, 53%]} would be enrolled in the RCT although the control-arm treatment of the RCT was not considered appropriate for them in the context of care. This rate differed by type of comparator [55% for non-head-to-head RCTs vs. 6% for head-to-head RCTs; adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 23.9 (95% CI: 5.5, 92.7)] and duration of trial control treatment [56% for ≤24 weeks and 15% for >24 weeks; aOR, 10.7 (95% CI: 2.8, 63.9)] but not patient RA activity [aOR, 2.5 (95% CI: 1.0, 6.6)]. The limitation of this study was that physicians gave their opinion on fictional patients with only RA.Conclusions Control treatments in RCTs of biologics in RA are often deemed not acceptable in the context of usual care, especially those for non-head-to-head RCTs. These findings raise ethical concerns and challenge the choice of the comparator in RCTs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.016

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a study of hypothetical decision making in doctors, around half indicated that they would enrol a patient in a randomised trial of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis despite considering the comparator inappropriate in the context of usual care.

    “In a study of hypothetical decision making in doctors, around half indicated that they would enrol a patient in a randomised trial of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis despite considering the comparator inappropriate in the context of usual care.159”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 48 · Cited by 4

Authors
Estellat, C., Tubach, F., Seror, R., Alfaiate, T., Hajage, D., De Rycke, Y., & Ravaud, P.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
Estellat, Candice
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
69
Pages
235-244
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1792182380
Cited by
4
References
48
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Keywords
rheumatoid arthritis, biologic therapy, control treatment, clinical trial recruitment, usual care, physician attitudes, trial ethics, treatment appropriateness, case vignettes, randomized controlled trials, trial duration, patient activity level
MeSH terms
Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Biological Products, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Therapeutic Equipoise

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review