Why even more clinical research studies may be false: effect of asymmetrical handling of clinically unexpected values

Real-world outcomes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the biosimilar era

Background

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is an aggressive and the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The clinical use of rituximab has improved the treatment response and survival of patients with DLBCL. The introduction of rituximab biosimilar into healthcare system has helped in providing a cost-effective treatment to B-cell lymphoid malignancies as standard of care and has improved access to patients worldwide. The aim of this study was to observe the real-world effectiveness and safety of Reditux™ and Ristova® in DLBCL patients.

Methods

Observational study in adults with DLBCL receiving Reditux™ or Ristova® across 29 centers in India (2015-2022). Effectiveness and safety were assessed up to 2 years after first dose.

Results

Out of 1,365 patients considered for analysis, 1,250 (91.6%) were treated with Reditux™ and 115 (8.42%) with Ristova®. At 2 years, progression-free survival (PFS) 69% [hazard ratio (HR), 1.16; 95% CI, 0.80-1.67], overall survival (OS) 78.7% (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.78-1.86), response rates, quality of life (QoL), and overall safety in both the cohorts were comparable. The best overall response rate (BORR) at 6 months was comparable with no statistically significant differences between the Reditux™ and the Ristova® cohorts (89.2% vs. 94.3%). In multivariate analysis, BCL-2 and VAS were significant prognostic factors for PFS.

Conclusion

Reditux™ and Ristova® were comparable in real-world setting.

Clinical Trial Registration

ISRCTN registry, identifier (ISRCTN13301166).

Blinding and Randomization

Most, if not all, guidelines, recommendations, and other texts on Good Research Practice emphasize the importance of blinding and randomization. There is, however, very limited specific guidance on when and how to apply blinding and randomization. This chapter aims to disambiguate these two terms by discussing what they mean, why they are applied, and how to conduct the acts of randomization and blinding. We discuss the use of blinding and randomization as the means against existing and potential risks of bias rather than a mandatory practice that is to be followed under all circumstances and at any cost. We argue that, in general, experiments should be blinded and randomized if (a) this is a confirmatory research that has a major impact on decision-making and that cannot be readily repeated (for ethical or resource-related reasons) and/or (b) no other measures can be applied to protect against existing and potential risks of bias.

Irresponsible Research and Innovation? Applying Findings from Neuroscience to Analysis of Unsustainable Hype Cycles

The introduction of technological innovations is often associated with suboptimal decisions and actions during cycles of inflated expectations, disappointment, and unintended negative consequences. For brevity, these can be referred to as hype cycles. Hitherto, studies have reported hype cycles for many different technologies, and studies have proposed different methods for improving the introduction of technological innovations. Yet hype cycles persist, despite suboptimal outcomes being widely reported and despite methods being available to improve outcomes. In this communication paper, findings from exploratory research are reported, which introduce new directions for addressing hype cycles. Through reference to neuroscience studies, it is explained that the behavior of some adults in hype cycles can be analogous to that of irresponsible behavior among adolescents. In particular, there is heightened responsiveness to peer presence and potential rewards. Accordingly, it is argued that methods applied successfully to reduce irresponsible behavior among adolescents are relevant to addressing hype cycles, and to facilitating more responsible research and innovation. The unsustainability of hype cycles is considered in relation to hype about artificial intelligence (AI). In particular, the potential for human-beneficial AI to have the unintended negative consequence of being fatally unbeneficial to everything else in the geosphere other than human beings.

The probability of probability and research truths

The foundation of much medical research rests on the statistical significance of the P-value, but we have fallen prey to the seductive certainty of significance. Other scientific disciplines work to a different standard. This may partly explain why medical reversal is an increasing phenomenon, whereby new studies (based on the 0.05 standard) overturn previous significant findings. This has generated a crisis in the rigour of evidence-based medicine, as many people erroneously believe that a P < 0.05 means the treatment effect is clinically important. However, statistics are not facts about the world. Nor should they be based on an arbitrary threshold that arose for historical reasons. This arbitrary threshold encourages an unthinking automatic response that contributes to industry's influence on medical research. Examples from emergency medicine practice illustrate these themes. Study replication needs to be valued as much as discovery. Careful and thoughtful unbiased thinking about the results we do have is undervalued.

Where Have All the Rodents Gone? The Effects of Attrition in Experimental Research on Cancer and Stroke

Given small sample sizes, loss of animals in preclinical experiments can dramatically alter results. However, effects of attrition on distortion of results are unknown. We used a simulation study to analyze the effects of random and biased attrition. As expected, random loss of samples decreased statistical power, but biased removal, including that of outliers, dramatically increased probability of false positive results. Next, we performed a meta-analysis of animal reporting and attrition in stroke and cancer. Most papers did not adequately report attrition, and extrapolating from the results of the simulation data, we suggest that their effect sizes were likely overestimated.

Effect of study design on the reported effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on quantitative physiological measures: stratified meta-analysis in narrow-QRS heart failure and implications for planning future studies

Background

Biventricular pacing (CRT) shows clear benefits in heart failure with wide QRS, but results in narrow QRS have appeared conflicting. We tested the hypothesis that study design might have influenced findings.

Method and Results

We identified all reports of CRT‐P/D therapy in subjects with narrow QRS reporting effects on continuous physiological variables. Twelve studies (2074 patients) met these criteria. Studies were stratified by presence of bias‐resistance steps: the presence of a randomized control arm over a single arm, and blinded outcome measurement. Change in each endpoint was quantified using a standardized effect size (Cohen's d). We conducted separate meta‐analyses for each variable in turn, stratified by trial quality. In non‐randomized, non‐blinded studies, the majority of variables (10 of 12, 83%) showed significant improvement, ranging from a standardized mean effect size of +1.57 (95%CI +0.43 to +2.7) for ejection fraction to +2.87 (+1.78 to +3.95) for NYHA class. In the randomized, non‐blinded study, only 3 out of 6 variables (50%) showed improvement. For the randomized blinded studies, 0 out of 9 variables (0%) showed benefit, ranging from −0.04 (−0.31 to +0.22) for ejection fraction to −0.1 (−0.73 to +0.53) for 6‐minute walk test.

Conclusions

Differences in degrees of resistance to bias, rather than choice of endpoint, explain the variation between studies of CRT in narrow‐QRS heart failure addressing physiological variables. When bias‐resistance features are implemented, it becomes clear that these patients do not improve in any tested physiological variable. Guidance from studies without careful planning to resist bias may be far less useful than commonly perceived.

Translating stem cell research to cardiac disease therapies: pitfalls and prospects for improvement

Over the past 2 decades, there have been numerous stem cell studies focused on cardiac diseases, ranging from proof-of-concept to phase 2 trials. This series of papers focuses on the legacy of these studies and the outlook for future treatment of cardiac diseases with stem cell therapies. The first section by Drs. Rosen and Myerburg is an independent review that analyzes the basic science and translational strategies supporting the rapid advance of stem cell technology to the clinic, the philosophies behind them, trial designs, and means for going forward that may impact favorably on progress. The second and third sections were collected as responses to the initial section of this review. The commentary by Drs. Francis and Cole discusses the review by Drs. Rosen and Myerburg and details how trial outcomes can be affected by noise, poor trial design (particularly the absence of blinding), and normal human tendencies toward optimism and denial. The final, independent paper by Dr. Marbán takes a different perspective concerning the potential for positive impact of stem cell research applied to heart disease and future prospects for its clinical application. (Compiled by the JACC editors).

Automated aortic Doppler flow tracing for reproducible research and clinical measurements

In clinical practice, echocardiographers are often unkeen to make the significant time investment to make additional multiple measurements of Doppler velocity. Main hurdle to obtaining multiple measurements is the time required to manually trace a series of Doppler traces. To make it easier to analyze more beats, we present the description of an application system for automated aortic Doppler envelope quantification, compatible with a range of hardware platforms. It analyses long Doppler strips, spanning many heartbeats, and does not require electrocardiogram to separate individual beats. We tested its measurement of velocity-time-integral and peak-velocity against the reference standard defined as the average of three experts who each made three separate measurements. The automated measurements of velocity-time-integral showed strong correspondence (R(2) = 0.94) and good Bland-Altman agreement (SD = 1.39 cm) with the reference consensus expert values, and indeed performed as well as the individual experts ( R(2) = 0.90 to 0.96, SD = 1.05 to 1.53 cm). The same performance was observed for peak-velocities; ( R(2) = 0.98, SD = 3.07 cm/s) and ( R(2) = 0.93 to 0.98, SD = 2.96 to 5.18 cm/s). This automated technology allows > 10 times as many beats to be analyzed compared to the conventional manual approach. This would make clinical and research protocols more precise for the same operator effort.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy and AV optimization increase myocardial oxygen consumption, but increase cardiac function more than proportionally

BACKGROUND

The mechanoenergetic effects of atrioventricular delay optimization during biventricular pacing ("cardiac resynchronization therapy", CRT) are unknown.

METHODS

Eleven patients with heart failure and left bundle branch block (LBBB) underwent invasive measurements of left ventricular (LV) developed pressure, aortic flow velocity-time-integral (VTI) and myocardial oxygen consumption (MVO2) at 4 pacing states: biventricular pacing (with VV 0 ms) at AVD 40 ms (AV-40), AVD 120 ms (AV-120, a common nominal AV delay), at their pre-identified individualised haemodynamic optimum (AV-Opt); and intrinsic conduction (LBBB).

RESULTS

AV-120, relative to LBBB, increased LV developed pressure by a mean of 11(SEM 2)%, p=0.001, and aortic VTI by 11(SEM 3)%, p=0.002, but also increased MVO2 by 11(SEM 5)%, p=0.04. AV-Opt further increased LV developed pressure by a mean of 2(SEM 1)%, p=0.035 and aortic VTI by 4(SEM 1)%, p=0.017. MVO2 trended further up by 7(SEM 5)%, p=0.22. Mechanoenergetics at AV-40 were no different from LBBB. The 4 states lay on a straight line for Δexternal work (ΔLV developed pressure × Δaortic VTI) against ΔMVO2, with slope 1.80, significantly >1 (p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Biventricular pacing and atrioventricular delay optimization increased external cardiac work done but also myocardial oxygen consumption. Nevertheless, the increase in cardiac work was ~80% greater than the increase in oxygen consumption, signifying an improvement in cardiac mechanoenergetics. Finally, the incremental effect of optimization on external work was approximately one-third beyond that of nominal AV pacing, along the same favourable efficiency trajectory, suggesting that AV delay dominates the biventricular pacing effect - which may therefore not be mainly "resynchronization".