Subgroup analysis in obstetrics clinical trials

Simulating survival data when one subgroup lacks information

In this paper, we aim to show the process of simulating survival data when the distribution of the overall population and one subgroup (called "positive subgroup") as well as the proportion of the subgroup is known, while the distribution of the other subgroup (called "negative subgroup") is unknown. We propose a combination method which generates survival data of the positive subgroup and negative subgroup, respectively, and survival data of the overall population are the combination of the two subgroups. The parameters of the overall population and the positive subgroup need to satisfy certain constraints, otherwise the parameters may lead to contradictions. From simulation, we show that our proposed combination method can reflect the correlation between the test statistics of overall population and positive subgroup, which makes the simulated data more realistic and the results of simulation more reliable. Moreover, for a multiplicity control in trial design, the combination method can help to determine the α splitting strategy between primary endpoints, and is helpful in designs of clinical trials as shown in three applications.

Pregnant Populations which Benefit from Vaginal Progesterone for Preventing Preterm Birth at <34 Weeks and Neonatal Morbidities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This study aimed to assess vaginal progesterone's effect on different populations and performed comparation between women with varied risk factors. Embase, PubMed, Cochrane library (CENTRAL) were searched without restriction to language up to February 25, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing vaginal progesterone administered to women at risk of preterm birth at <37 weeks. Two reviewers independently extracted data, and pooled relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated as well. Women with short cervix have a significantly lower risk of preterm birth at <34 weeks (pooled RR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.55-0.77; I 2 = 0; p < 0.001; nine studies) and some neonatal morbidities; interaction tests showed that effect of vaginal progesterone differs significantly between women with short cervix and those with other risk factors (history of preterm birth, exclusive twin gestation, and vaginal bleeding). Evidences of this study showed that singleton gestations, as well as women with short cervix, benefit from vaginal progesterone in preventing preterm birth at <34 weeks and some neonatal morbidities. Women with short cervix are populations who benefit the most among other risk populations. KEY POINTS: · Vaginal progesterone reduces preterm birth and neonatal morbidities.. · Vaginal progesterone effects on some specific populations.. · Women with short cervix benefit the most..

Vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in twin gestations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in twin gestations.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to January 31, 2023), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared vaginal progesterone to placebo or no treatment in asymptomatic women with a twin gestation.

METHODS

The systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The primary outcome was preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included adverse perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. We assessed the risk of bias in each included study, heterogeneity, publication bias, and quality of evidence, and performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (3401 women and 6802 fetuses/infants) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among all twin gestations, there were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and placebo or no treatment groups in the risk of preterm birth <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.17; high-quality evidence), <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.06; high-quality evidence), and <28 weeks (relative risk, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.55; moderate-quality evidence), and spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.18; high-quality evidence). Vaginal progesterone had no significant effect on any of the perinatal outcomes evaluated. Subgroup analyses showed that there was no evidence of a different effect of vaginal progesterone on preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation related to chorionicity, type of conception, history of spontaneous preterm birth, daily dose of vaginal progesterone, and gestational age at initiation of treatment. The frequencies of preterm birth <37, <34, <32, <30, and <28 weeks of gestation and adverse perinatal outcomes did not significantly differ between the vaginal progesterone and placebo or no treatment groups in unselected twin gestations (8 studies; 3274 women and 6548 fetuses/infants). Among twin gestations with a transvaginal sonographic cervical length <30 mm (6 studies; 306 women and 612 fetuses/infants), vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of preterm birth occurring at <28 to <32 gestational weeks (relative risks, 0.48-0.65; moderate- to high-quality evidence), neonatal death (relative risk, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.92; moderate-quality evidence), and birthweight <1500 g (relative risk, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.88; high-quality evidence). Vaginal progesterone significantly reduced the risk of preterm birth occurring at <28 to <34 gestational weeks (relative risks, 0.41-0.68), composite neonatal morbidity and mortality (relative risk, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.98), and birthweight <1500 g (relative risk, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.94) in twin gestations with a transvaginal sonographic cervical length ≤25 mm (6 studies; 95 women and 190 fetuses/infants). The quality of evidence was moderate for all these outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal progesterone does not prevent preterm birth, nor does it improve perinatal outcomes in unselected twin gestations, but it appears to reduce the risk of preterm birth occurring at early gestational ages and of neonatal morbidity and mortality in twin gestations with a sonographic short cervix. However, more evidence is needed before recommending this intervention to this subset of patients.

Does vaginal progesterone prevent recurrent preterm birth in women with a singleton gestation and a history of spontaneous preterm birth? Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of spontaneous preterm birth.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to February 28, 2022), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared vaginal progesterone to placebo or no treatment in asymptomatic women with a singleton gestation and a history of spontaneous preterm birth.

METHODS

The primary outcomes were preterm birth <37 and <34 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes included adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. We assessed the risk of bias in the included studies, heterogeneity (I2 test), small-study effects, publication bias, and quality of evidence; performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses; and calculated 95% prediction intervals and adjusted relative risks.

RESULTS

Ten studies (2958 women) met the inclusion criteria: 7 with a sample size <150 (small studies) and 3 with a sample size >600 (large studies). Among the 7 small studies, 4 were at high risk of bias, 2 were at some concerns of bias, and only 1 was at low risk of bias. All the large studies were at low risk of bias. Vaginal progesterone significantly decreased the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.81; I2=75%; 95% prediction interval, 0.31-1.32; very low-quality evidence) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.92; I2=66%; 95% prediction interval, 0.23-1.68; very low-quality evidence), and the risk of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.85; I2=67%; 95% prediction interval, 0.16-1.79; low-quality evidence). There were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and the placebo or no treatment groups in other adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes. Subgroup analyses revealed that vaginal progesterone decreased the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.55; I2=0%) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.49; I2=0%) in the small but not in the large studies (relative risk, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.09; I2=0% for preterm birth <37 weeks; and relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.13; I2=0% for preterm birth <34 weeks). Sensitivity analyses restricted to studies at low risk of bias indicated that vaginal progesterone did not reduce the risk of preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.09) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.15). There was clear evidence of substantial small-study effects in the meta-analyses of preterm birth <37 and <34 weeks of gestation because of funnel plot asymmetry and the marked differences in the pooled relative risks obtained from fixed-effect and random-effects models. The adjustment for small-study effects resulted in a markedly reduced and nonsignificant effect of vaginal progesterone on preterm birth <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.10) and <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.42).

CONCLUSION

There is no convincing evidence supporting the use of vaginal progesterone to prevent recurrent preterm birth or to improve perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a history of spontaneous preterm birth.

Cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials that have assessed the efficacy of cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women have reported conflicting results.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in asymptomatic high-risk women.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, CINAHL, and LILACS (from their inception to October 31, 2019), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared cervical pessary with standard care (no pessary) or alternative interventions in asymptomatic women at high risk for preterm birth.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook guidelines. The primary outcome was spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included adverse pregnancy, maternal, and perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (4687 women and 7167 fetuses/infants) met the inclusion criteria: 8 evaluated pessary vs no pessary in women with a short cervix, 2 assessed pessary vs no pessary in unselected multiple gestations, and 2 compared pessary vs vaginal progesterone in women with a short cervix. There were no significant differences between the pessary and no pessary groups in the risk of spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation among singleton gestations with a cervical length ≤25 mm (relative risk, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-1.49; 6 trials, 1982 women; low-quality evidence), unselected twin gestations (relative risk, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.41; 1 trial, 1177 women; moderate-quality evidence), twin gestations with a cervical length <38 mm (relative risk, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.36; 3 trials, 1128 women; low-quality evidence), and twin gestations with a cervical length ≤25 mm (relative risk; 0.72, 95% confidence interval, 0.25-2.06; 2 trials, 348 women; low-quality evidence). Overall, no significant differences were observed between the pessary and no pessary groups in preterm birth <37, <32, and <28 weeks of gestation, and most adverse pregnancy, maternal, and perinatal outcomes (low- to moderate-quality evidence for most outcomes). There were no significant differences in the risk of spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation between pessary and vaginal progesterone in singleton gestations with a cervical length ≤25 mm (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.83; 1 trial, 246 women; low-quality evidence) and twin gestations with a cervical length <38 mm (relative risk, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-1.18; 1 trial, 297 women; very low-quality evidence). Vaginal discharge was significantly more frequent in the pessary group than in the no pessary and vaginal progesterone groups (relative risks, ∼2.20; high-quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence does not support the use of cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth or to improve perinatal outcomes in singleton or twin gestations with a short cervix and in unselected twin gestations.

Vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a short cervix: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a short cervix has been questioned after publication of the OPPTIMUM study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether vaginal progesterone prevents preterm birth and improves perinatal outcomes in asymptomatic women with a singleton gestation and a midtrimester sonographic short cervix.

STUDY DESIGN

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to September 2017); Cochrane databases; bibliographies; and conference proceedings for randomized controlled trials comparing vaginal progesterone vs placebo/no treatment in women with a singleton gestation and a midtrimester sonographic cervical length ≤25 mm. This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. The primary outcome was preterm birth <33 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included adverse perinatal outcomes and neurodevelopmental and health outcomes at 2 years of age. Individual patient data were analyzed using a 2-stage approach. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Data were available from 974 women (498 allocated to vaginal progesterone, 476 allocated to placebo) with a cervical length ≤25 mm participating in 5 high-quality trials. Vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of preterm birth <33 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.81; P = .0006; high-quality evidence). Moreover, vaginal progesterone significantly decreased the risk of preterm birth <36, <35, <34, <32, <30, and <28 weeks of gestation; spontaneous preterm birth <33 and <34 weeks of gestation; respiratory distress syndrome; composite neonatal morbidity and mortality; birthweight <1500 and <2500 g; and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (relative risks from 0.47-0.82; high-quality evidence for all). There were 7 (1.4%) neonatal deaths in the vaginal progesterone group and 15 (3.2%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-1.07; P = .07; low-quality evidence). Maternal adverse events, congenital anomalies, and adverse neurodevelopmental and health outcomes at 2 years of age did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal progesterone decreases the risk of preterm birth and improves perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a midtrimester sonographic short cervix, without any demonstrable deleterious effects on childhood neurodevelopment.

Racial/ethnic disparities in magnesium sulfate neuroprotection: a subgroup analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Despite known racial disparities in obstetrics, as well as differences in magnesium pharmacodynamics according to race, the effect of race/ethnicity in magnesium sulfate (MgSO₄) use during pregnancy has not been studied. Whether some mothers are at increased risk of side effects, or infants at decreased neuroprotective effects is unknown. We analyze the effect of race/ethnicity in maternal/infant outcomes after MgSO₄ neuroprotection.

STUDY DESIGN

Subgroup analysis of a multicenter clinical trial (BEAM trial) where pregnant women at risk of preterm birth were randomized to either MgSO₄ or placebo. For this study, nonanomalous singleton pregnancies were studied. The effect of race in maternal/neonatal outcomes after MgSO₄ was analyzed with Breslow-Day and multifactorial ANOVA. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) of complications according to race.

RESULTS

922 MgSO₄ and 972 placebo cases were included (45.0% African-American, 36.2% Caucasian, 17.8% Hispanics, and 1.0% Asians). Interaction analysis showed a significant effect of race/ethnicity (p = .043). Hispanics presented the highest frequency (88.3%, p < .001), as well as the highest odds of MgSO₄ side effects [OR(95%CI) = 6.6 (1.3-33.8)].

CONCLUSION

Hispanics present increased risk of magnesium toxicity compared to other racial/ethnic groups. Whether specific racial/ethnic groups require closer surveillance for early signs of magnesium toxicity needs to be further explored.

Vaginal progesterone decreases preterm birth and neonatal morbidity and mortality in women with a twin gestation and a short cervix: an updated meta-analysis of individual patient data

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth and neonatal morbidity and mortality in asymptomatic women with a twin gestation and a sonographic short cervix (cervical length ≤ 25 mm) in the mid-trimester.

METHODS

This was an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data (IPD) from randomized controlled trials comparing vaginal progesterone with placebo/no treatment in women with a twin gestation and a mid-trimester sonographic cervical length ≤ 25 mm. MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, CINAHL and LILACS (all from inception to 31 December 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Research Registers of ongoing trials, Google Scholar, conference proceedings and reference lists of identified studies were searched. The primary outcome measure was preterm birth < 33 weeks' gestation. Two reviewers independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted the data. Pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

IPD were available for 303 women (159 assigned to vaginal progesterone and 144 assigned to placebo/no treatment) and their 606 fetuses/infants from six randomized controlled trials. One study, which included women with a cervical length between 20 and 25 mm, provided 74% of the total sample size of the IPD meta-analysis. Vaginal progesterone, compared with placebo/no treatment, was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of preterm birth < 33 weeks' gestation (31.4% vs 43.1%; RR, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.51-0.93); moderate-quality evidence). Moreover, vaginal progesterone administration was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of preterm birth < 35, < 34, < 32 and < 30 weeks' gestation (RRs ranging from 0.47 to 0.83), neonatal death (RR, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.35-0.81)), respiratory distress syndrome (RR, 0.70 (95% CI, 0.56-0.89)), composite neonatal morbidity and mortality (RR, 0.61 (95% CI, 0.34-0.98)), use of mechanical ventilation (RR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.36-0.81)) and birth weight < 1500 g (RR, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.35-0.80)) (all moderate-quality evidence). There were no significant differences in neurodevelopmental outcomes at 4-5 years of age between the vaginal progesterone and placebo groups.

CONCLUSION

Administration of vaginal progesterone to asymptomatic women with a twin gestation and a sonographic short cervix in the mid-trimester reduces the risk of preterm birth occurring at < 30 to < 35 gestational weeks, neonatal mortality and some measures of neonatal morbidity, without any demonstrable deleterious effects on childhood neurodevelopment. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Population differences and the effect of vaginal progesterone on preterm birth in women with threatened preterm labor (.)

OBJECTIVE

Threatened preterm labor (tPTL) is a complication of pregnancy. Identification of women and clinical definition differs between countries. This study investigated differences in tPTL and effectiveness of vaginal progesterone to prevent preterm birth (PTB) between two countries.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) from Argentina and Switzerland comparing vaginal progesterone to placebo in women with tPTL (n = 379). Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to compare placebo groups of both countries and to compare progesterone to placebo within each country. We adjusted for baseline differences. Iatrogenic onset of labor or pregnancy beyond gestational age of interest was censored.

RESULTS

Swiss and Argentinian women were different on baseline. Risks for delivery <14 days and PTB < 34 and < 37 weeks were increased in Argentina compared to Switzerland, HR 3.3 (95% CI 0.62-18), 54 (95% CI 5.1-569) and 3.1 (95% CI 1.1-8.4). In Switzerland, progesterone increased the risk for delivery <14 days [HR 4.4 (95% CI 1.3-15.7)] and PTB <37 weeks [HR 2.5 (95% CI 1.4-4.8)], in Argentina there was no such effect.

CONCLUSION

In women with tPTL, the effect of progesterone may vary due to population differences. Differences in populations should be considered in multicenter RCTs.

A comparison of three clustering methods for finding subgroups in MRI, SMS or clinical data: SPSS TwoStep Cluster analysis, Latent Gold and SNOB

Background

There are various methodological approaches to identifying clinically important subgroups and one method is to identify clusters of characteristics that differentiate people in cross-sectional and/or longitudinal data using Cluster Analysis (CA) or Latent Class Analysis (LCA). There is a scarcity of head-to-head comparisons that can inform the choice of which clustering method might be suitable for particular clinical datasets and research questions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to perform a head-to-head comparison of three commonly available methods (SPSS TwoStep CA, Latent Gold LCA and SNOB LCA).

Methods

The performance of these three methods was compared: (i) quantitatively using the number of subgroups detected, the classification probability of individuals into subgroups, the reproducibility of results, and (ii) qualitatively using subjective judgments about each program’s ease of use and interpretability of the presentation of results.

We analysed five real datasets of varying complexity in a secondary analysis of data from other research projects. Three datasets contained only MRI findings (n = 2,060 to 20,810 vertebral disc levels), one dataset contained only pain intensity data collected for 52 weeks by text (SMS) messaging (n = 1,121 people), and the last dataset contained a range of clinical variables measured in low back pain patients (n = 543 people). Four artificial datasets (n = 1,000 each) containing subgroups of varying complexity were also analysed testing the ability of these clustering methods to detect subgroups and correctly classify individuals when subgroup membership was known.

Results

The results from the real clinical datasets indicated that the number of subgroups detected varied, the certainty of classifying individuals into those subgroups varied, the findings had perfect reproducibility, some programs were easier to use and the interpretability of the presentation of their findings also varied. The results from the artificial datasets indicated that all three clustering methods showed a near-perfect ability to detect known subgroups and correctly classify individuals into those subgroups.

Conclusions

Our subjective judgement was that Latent Gold offered the best balance of sensitivity to subgroups, ease of use and presentation of results with these datasets but we recognise that different clustering methods may suit other types of data and clinical research questions.

Interpretation of subgroup effects in published trials

With the rapidly expanding number of studies reporting on treatment subgroups come new challenges in analyzing and interpreting this sometimes complex area of the literature. This article discusses 3 important issues regarding the analysis and interpretation of existing trials or systematic reviews that report on treatment effect modifiers (subgroups) for specific physical therapy interventions. The key messages are: (1) point estimates of treatment modifier effect size (interaction effect) and their confidence intervals can be calculated using group-level data when individual patient-level data are not available; (2) interaction effects do not define the total effect size of the intervention in the subgroup but rather how much more effective it is in the subgroup than in those not in the subgroup; (3) recommendations regarding the use of an intervention in a subgroup need to consider the size and direction of the main effect and the interaction effect; and (4) rather than simply judging whether a treatment modifier effect is clinically important based only on the interaction effect size, a better criterion is to determine whether the combined effect of the interaction effect and main effect makes the difference between an overall effect that is clinically important and one that is not clinically important.

The efficacy of targeted interventions for modifiable psychosocial risk factors of persistent nonspecific low back pain - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is considerable interest in whether best practice management of nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) should include the targeting of treatment to subgroups of people with identifiable clinical characteristics. However, there are no published systematic reviews of the efficacy of targeted psychosocial interventions.

AIM

This review aimed to determine if the efficacy of interventions for psychosocial risk factors of persistent NSLBP is improved when targeted to people with particular psychosocial characteristics.

METHOD

Bibliographic databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials of targeted psychosocial interventions that used trial designs capable of providing robust information on the efficacy of targeted treatment (treatment effect modification) for the outcomes of pain, activity limitation and psychosocial factors (fear avoidance, catastrophisation, anxiety and depression).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Four studies met the inclusion criteria and collectively investigated nine hypotheses about targeted treatment on 28 subgroup/treatment outcomes. There were only two statistically significant results. Graded activity plus Treatment Based Classification targeted to people with high movement-related fear was more effective than Treatment Based Classification at reducing movement-related fear at 4 weeks. Active rehabilitation (physical exercise classes with cognitive-behavioural principles) was more effective than usual GP care at reducing activity limitation at 12 months, when targeted to people with higher movement-related pain. Few studies have investigated targeted psychosocial interventions in NSLBP, using trial designs suitable for measuring treatment effect modification, and they do not provide consistent evidence supporting such targeting. There is a need for appropriately designed and adequately powered trials to investigate targeted psychosocial interventions.

Vaginal progesterone in women with an asymptomatic sonographic short cervix in the midtrimester decreases preterm delivery and neonatal morbidity: a systematic review and metaanalysis of individual patient data

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of vaginal progesterone in asymptomatic women with a sonographic short cervix (≤ 25 mm) in the midtrimester reduces the risk of preterm birth and improves neonatal morbidity and mortality.

STUDY DESIGN

Individual patient data metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

Five trials of high quality were included with a total of 775 women and 827 infants. Treatment with vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of preterm birth <33 weeks (relative risk [RR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.80), <35 weeks (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.88), and <28 weeks (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.30-0.81); respiratory distress syndrome (RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.30-0.76); composite neonatal morbidity and mortality (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.40-0.81); birthweight <1500 g (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38-0.80); admission to neonatal intensive care unit (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.94); and requirement for mechanical ventilation (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-0.98). There were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and placebo groups in the rate of adverse maternal events or congenital anomalies.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal progesterone administration to asymptomatic women with a sonographic short cervix reduces the risk of preterm birth and neonatal morbidity and mortality.

Re-evaluation of the subgroup analysis from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists randomized controlled trial of cervical cerclage

History-indicated cervical cerclage is offered to patients who are at risk of spontaneous preterm birth (SPTB), though the indications are controversial. A common practice of offering cerclage after three prior SPTBs or midtrimester losses (MTLs) is based on findings of the subgroup analysis of the 1993 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) randomized trial of cervical cerclage. The subgroup analysis was performed by repeating the primary analysis within individual subgroups, which can lead to erroneous conclusions. We repeated the subgroup analysis by evaluating the interaction between the characteristic of interest and treatment allocation in a regression model. The interaction between cerclage and any prior PTB as a binary variable was non-significant. Among subjects delivering at <37 weeks, there was a significant interaction between cerclage and prior PTBs as a continuous variable or ≥ 3 (p-values 0.04 and 0.03, respectively). There were no significant interactions between cerclage and the aforementioned outcomes among women who delivered at <33 weeks, though this may have been secondary to a smaller number of SPTB in this range. Our findings lend credence to the current recommendations regarding the use of history-indicated cerclage, though they remain subject to the inherent limitations of subgroup analyses.

Oral contraceptive formulation and risk of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

While evidence on the association between oral contraceptive (OC) use and breast cancer generally suggests little or no increased risk, the question of whether breast cancer risk varies by OC formulation remains controversial. Few studies have examined this issue because large samples and extensive OC histories are required.

STUDY DESIGN

We used data from a multicenter, population-based, case-control investigation. Women aged 35-64 years were interviewed. To explore the association between OC formulation and breast cancer risk, we used conditional logistic regression to derive adjusted odds ratios, and we used likelihood ratio tests for heterogeneity to assess whether breast cancer risk varied by OC formulation. Key OC exposure variables were ever use, current or former use, duration of use and time since last use. To strengthen inferences about specific formulations, we restricted most analyses to the 2282 women with breast cancer and the 2424 women without breast cancer who reported no OC use or exclusive use of one OC.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight formulations were reported by the 2674 women who used one OC; most OC formulations were used by only a few women. We conducted multivariable analyses on the 10 formulations that were each used by at least 50 women and conducted supplemental analyses on selected formulations of interest based on recent research. Breast cancer risk did not vary significantly by OC formulation, and no formulation was associated with a significantly increased breast cancer risk.

CONCLUSIONS

These results add to the small body of literature on the relationship between OC formulation and breast cancer. Our data are reassuring in that, among women 35-64 years of age, we found no evidence that specific OC formulations increase breast cancer risk.

Research methods for subgrouping low back pain

Background

There is considerable clinician and researcher interest in whether the outcomes for patients with low back pain, and the efficiency of the health systems that treat them, can be improved by 'subgrouping research'. Subgrouping research seeks to identify subgroups of people who have clinically important distinctions in their treatment needs or prognoses. Due to a proliferation of research methods and variability in how subgrouping results are interpreted, it is timely to open discussion regarding a conceptual framework for the research designs and statistical methods available for subgrouping studies (a method framework). The aims of this debate article are: (1) to present a method framework to inform the design and evaluation of subgrouping research in low back pain, (2) to describe method options when investigating prognostic effects or subgroup treatment effects, and (3) to discuss the strengths and limitations of research methods suitable for the hypothesis-setting phase of subgroup studies.

Discussion

The proposed method framework proposes six phases for studies of subgroups: studies of assessment methods, hypothesis-setting studies, hypothesis-testing studies, narrow validation studies, broad validation studies, and impact analysis studies. This framework extends and relabels a classification system previously proposed by McGinn et al (2000) as suitable for studies of clinical prediction rules. This extended classification, and its descriptive terms, explicitly anchor research findings to the type of evidence each provides. The inclusive nature of the framework invites appropriate consideration of the results of diverse research designs. Method pathways are described for studies designed to test and quantify prognostic effects or subgroup treatment effects, and examples are discussed. The proposed method framework is presented as a roadmap for conversation amongst researchers and clinicians who plan, stage and perform subgrouping research.

Summary

This article proposes a research method framework for studies of subgroups in low back pain. Research designs and statistical methods appropriate for sequential phases in this research are discussed, with an emphasis on those suitable for hypothesis-setting studies of subgroups of people seeking care.

Treatment-based subgroups of low back pain: a guide to appraisal of research studies and a summary of current evidence

There has been a recent increase in research evaluating treatment-based subgroups of non-specific low back pain. The aim of these sub-classification schemes is to identify subgroups of patients who will respond preferentially to one treatment as opposed to another. Our article provides accessible guidance on to how to interpret this research and determine its implications for clinical practice. We propose that studies evaluating treatment-based subgroups can be interpreted in the context of a three-stage process: (1) hypothesis generation-proposal of clinical features to define subgroups; (2) hypothesis testing-a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test that subgroup membership modifies the effect of a treatment; and (3) replication-another RCT to confirm the results of stage 2 and ensure that findings hold beyond the specific original conditions. At this point, the bulk of research evidence in defining subgroups of patients with low back pain is in the hypothesis generation stage; no classification system is supported by sufficient evidence to recommend implementation into clinical practice.

Critical appraisal of clinical prediction rules that aim to optimize treatment selection for musculoskeletal conditions

BACKGROUND

Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) for treatment selection in musculoskeletal conditions have become increasingly popular.

PURPOSE

The purposes of this review are: (1) to critically appraise studies evaluating CPRs and (2) to consider the clinical utility and stage of development of each CPR.

DATA SOURCES

Pertinent databases were searched up to April 2009. Studies aiming to develop or evaluate a CPR for treatment response in musculoskeletal conditions were included. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility and extracted methodological data, stage of development, and effect size information. STUDY SELECTION/DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Eighteen studies, evaluating 15 separate CPRs, were included. Fourteen CPRs were at the derivation stage, and all CPRs had been evaluated using a single-arm trial design, thus it is not possible to determine whether the CPRs identify prognosis (regardless of treatment) or specifically response to treatment. The CPR at the validation stage investigated spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for low back pain and had been evaluated in 2 separate well-conducted randomized controlled trials. The first trial demonstrated a clinically meaningful effect of the SMT CPR; the additional effect from SMT in patients "positive-on-the-rule" was 15 Oswestry disability units at week 1 and 9 units at week 4. The second trial showed that the CPR did not generalize to a different clinical setting, including a modified treatment.

LIMITATIONS

Due to differences in methods of reporting and journal publication restraints (eg, word count restrictions), some quality assessment items may have been completed in the included studies, but not captured in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

There is, at present, little evidence that CPRs can be used to predict effects of treatment for musculoskeletal conditions. The principal problem is that most studies use designs that cannot differentiate between predictors of response to treatment and general predictors of outcome. Only 1 CPR has been evaluated within an RCT designed to predict response to treatment. Validation of these rules is imperative to allow clinical application.

Does targeting manual therapy and/or exercise improve patient outcomes in nonspecific low back pain? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

A central element in the current debate about best practice management of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is the efficacy of targeted versus generic (non-targeted) treatment. Many clinicians and researchers believe that tailoring treatment to NSLBP subgroups positively impacts on patient outcomes. Despite this, there are no systematic reviews comparing the efficacy of targeted versus non-targeted manual therapy and/or exercise. This systematic review was undertaken in order to determine the efficacy of such targeted treatment in adults with NSLBP.

METHOD

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, AMED and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were electronically searched, reference lists were examined and citation tracking performed. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials of targeted manual therapy and/or exercise for NSLPB that used trial designs capable of providing robust information on targeted treatment (treatment effect modification) for the outcomes of activity limitation and pain. Included trials needed to be hypothesis-testing studies published in English, Danish or Norwegian. Method quality was assessed using the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group.

RESULTS

Four high-quality randomized controlled trials of targeted manual therapy and/or exercise for NSLBP met the inclusion criteria. One study showed statistically significant effects for short-term outcomes using McKenzie directional preference-based exercise. Research into subgroups requires much larger sample sizes than traditional two-group trials and other included studies showed effects that might be clinically important in size but were not statistically significant with their samples sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical implications of these results are that they provide very cautious evidence supporting the notion that treatment targeted to subgroups of patients with NSLBP may improve patient outcomes. The results of the studies included in this review are too patchy, inconsistent and the samples investigated are too small for any recommendation of any treatment in routine clinical practice to be based on these findings. The research shows that adequately powered controlled trials using designs capable of providing robust information on treatment effect modification are uncommon. Considering how central the notion of targeted treatment is to manual therapy principles, further studies using this research method should be a priority for the clinical and research communities.

Induction of labour versus expectant monitoring for gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia after 36 weeks' gestation (HYPITAT): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Robust evidence to direct management of pregnant women with mild hypertensive disease at term is scarce. We investigated whether induction of labour in women with a singleton pregnancy complicated by gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia reduces severe maternal morbidity.

METHODS

We undertook a multicentre, parallel, open-label randomised controlled trial in six academic and 32 non-academic hospitals in the Netherlands between October, 2005, and March, 2008. We enrolled patients with a singleton pregnancy at 36-41 weeks' gestation, and who had gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio by block randomisation with a web-based application system to receive either induction of labour or expectant monitoring. Masking of intervention allocation was not possible. The primary outcome was a composite measure of poor maternal outcome--maternal mortality, maternal morbidity (eclampsia, HELLP syndrome, pulmonary oedema, thromboembolic disease, and placental abruption), progression to severe hypertension or proteinuria, and major post-partum haemorrhage (>1000 mL blood loss). Analysis was by intention to treat and treatment effect is presented as relative risk. This study is registered, number ISRCTN08132825.

FINDINGS

756 patients were allocated to receive induction of labour (n=377 patients) or expectant monitoring (n=379). 397 patients refused randomisation but authorised use of their medical records. Of women who were randomised, 117 (31%) allocated to induction of labour developed poor maternal outcome compared with 166 (44%) allocated to expectant monitoring (relative risk 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.86, p<0.0001). No cases of maternal or neonatal death or eclampsia were recorded.

INTERPRETATION

Induction of labour is associated with improved maternal outcome and should be advised for women with mild hypertensive disease beyond 37 weeks' gestation.

FUNDING

ZonMw.

A guide to interpretation of studies investigating subgroups of responders to physical therapy interventions

Many researchers and clinicians believe the effectiveness of existing physical therapy interventions can be improved by targeting the provision of specific interventions at patients who respond best to that treatment. Although this approach has the potential to improve outcomes for some patients, it needs to be implemented carefully because some methods used to identify subgroups can produce biased or misleading results. The aim of this article is to assist readers in assessing the validity and generalizability of studies designed to identify subgroups of responders to physical therapy interventions. The key messages are that subgroups should be identified using high-quality randomized controlled trials, the investigation should be limited to a relatively small number of potential subgroups for which there is a plausible rationale, subgroup effects should be investigated by formally analyzing statistical interactions, and findings of subgroups should be subject to external validation.

SAVVY vaginal gel (C31G) for prevention of HIV infection: a randomized controlled trial in Nigeria

BACKGROUND

The objective of this trial was to determine the effectiveness of 1.0% C31G (SAVVY) in preventing male-to-female vaginal transmission of HIV infection among women at high risk.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

This was a Phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Participants made up to 12 monthly follow-up visits for HIV testing, adverse event reporting, and study product supply. The study was conducted between September 2004 and December 2006 in Lagos and Ibadan, Nigeria, where we enrolled 2153 HIV-negative women at high risk of HIV infection. Participants were randomized 1 ratio 1 to SAVVY or placebo. The effectiveness endpoint was incidence of HIV infection as indicated by detection of HIV antibodies in oral mucosal transudate (rapid test) or blood (ELISA), and confirmed by Western blot or PCR testing. We observed 33 seroconversions (21 in the SAVVY group, 12 in the placebo group). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of the cumulative probability of HIV infection at 12 months were 0.028 in the SAVVY group and 0.015 in the placebo group (2-sided p-value for the log-rank test of treatment effect 0.121). The point estimate of the hazard ratio was 1.7 for SAVVY versus placebo (95% confidence interval 0.9, 3.5). Because of lower-than-expected HIV incidence, we did not observe the required number of HIV infections (66) for adequate power to detect an effect of SAVVY. Follow-up frequencies of adverse events, reproductive tract adverse events, abnormal pelvic examination findings, chlamydial infections and vaginal infections were similar in the study arms. No serious adverse event was attributable to SAVVY use.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

SAVVY did not reduce the incidence of HIV infection. Although the hazard ratio was higher in the SAVVY than the placebo group, we cannot conclude that there was a harmful treatment effect of SAVVY.