Article

Spontaneous improvement in randomised clinical trials: meta-analysis of three-armed trials comparing no treatment, placebo and active intervention. BMC Med Res Methodol 9:1

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Dept, 3343, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
BMC Medical Research Methodology (Impact Factor: 2.17). 02/2009; 9(1):1. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It can be challenging for patients and clinicians to properly interpret a change in the clinical condition after a treatment has been given. It is not known to which extent spontaneous improvement, effect of placebo and effect of active interventions contribute to the observed change from baseline, and we aimed at quantifying these contributions.
Systematic review and meta-analysis, based on a Cochrane review of the effect of placebo interventions for all clinical conditions. We selected all trials that had randomised the patients to three arms: no treatment, placebo and active intervention, and that had used an outcome that was measured on a continuous scale or on a ranking scale. Clinical conditions that had been studied in less than three trials were excluded.
We analysed 37 trials (2900 patients) that covered 8 clinical conditions. The active interventions were psychological in 17 trials, physical in 15 trials, and pharmacological in 5 trials. Overall, across all conditions and interventions, there was a statistically significant change from baseline in all three arms. The standardized mean difference (SMD) for change from baseline was -0.24 (95% confidence interval -0.36 to -0.12) for no treatment, -0.44 (-0.61 to -0.28) for placebo, and -1.01 (-1.16 to -0.86) for active treatment. Thus, on average, the relative contributions of spontaneous improvement and of placebo to that of the active interventions were 24% and 20%, respectively, but with some uncertainty, as indicated by the confidence intervals for the three SMDs. The conditions that had the most pronounced spontaneous improvement were nausea (45%), smoking (40%), depression (35%), phobia (34%) and acute pain (25%).
Spontaneous improvement and effect of placebo contributed importantly to the observed treatment effect in actively treated patients, but the relative importance of these factors differed according to clinical condition and intervention.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Aug 31, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
69 Views
 · 
15 Downloads
  • Source
    • "We did use an attention control group as a comparator and not a no-treatment group. This has the benefit of isolating the potential biological effect of aerobic exercise on depressive symptoms [34], but also introduces a risk of contamination in the control group. As an argument against the latter possibility, the maximal oxygen uptake did not improve in the control group compared with baseline data, which suggests that this group was not ‘contaminated’ by increased fitness levels. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The effect of referring patients from a clinical setting to a pragmatic exercise intervention for depressive symptoms, cognitive function, and metabolic variables has yet to be determined. Outpatients with major depression (DSM-IV) were allocated to supervised aerobic or stretching exercise groups during a three months period. The primary outcome was the Hamilton depression score (HAM-D(17)). Secondary outcomes were cognitive function, cardiovascular risk markers, and employment related outcomes. 56 participants were allocated to the aerobic exercise intervention versus 59 participants to the stretching exercise group. Post intervention the mean difference between groups was -0.78 points on the HAM-D(17) (95% CI -3.2 to 1.6; P = .52). At follow-up, the participants in the aerobic exercise group had higher maximal oxygen uptake (mean difference 4.4 l/kg/min; 95% CI 1.7 to 7.0; P = .001) and visuospatial memory on Rey's Complex Figure Test (mean difference 3.2 points; 95% CI 0.9 to 5.5; P = .007) and lower blood glucose levels (mean difference 0.2 mmol/l; 95% CI 0.0 to 0.5; P = .04) and waist circumference (mean difference 2.2 cm; 95% CI 0.3 to 4.1; P = .02) compared with the stretching exercise group. The results of this trial does not support any antidepressant effect of referring patients with major depression to a three months aerobic exercise program. Due to lower recruitment than anticipated, the trial was terminated prior to reaching the pre-defined sample size of 212 participants; therefore the results should be interpreted in that context. However, the DEMO-II trial does suggest that an exercise program for patients with depression offer positive short-term effects on maximal oxygen uptake, visuospatial memory, fasting glucose levels, and waist circumference. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00695552.
    PLoS ONE 10/2012; 7(10):e48316. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0048316 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Therefore, to demonstrate a genuine placebo effect for an oral treatment, one should ideally use, at least, a three arm trial design (verum, placebo, and no treatment) [6]. Differences between the verum and placebo reflect the specific effect. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We present a theory according which a headache treatment acts through a specific biological effect (when it exists), a placebo effect linked to both expectancy and repetition of its administration (conditioning), and a non-specific psychological effect. The respective part of these components varies with the treatments and the clinical situations. During antiquity, suggestions and beliefs were the mainstays of headache treatment. The word placebo appeared at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Controversies about its effect came from an excessive interpretation due to methodological bias, inadequate consideration of the variation of the measure (regression to the mean) and of the natural course of the disease. Several powerful studies on placebo effect showed that the nature of the treatment, the associated announce, the patients' expectancy, and the repetition of the procedures are of paramount importance. The placebo expectancy is associated with an activation of pre-frontal, anterior cingular, accumbens, and periacqueducal grey opioidergic neurons possibly triggered by the dopaminergic meso-limbic system. In randomized control trials, several arms design could theoretically give information concerning the respective part of the different component of the outcome and control the natural course of the disease. However, for migraine and tension type headache attacks treatment, no three arm (verum, placebo, and natural course) trial is available in the literature. Indirect evidence of a placebo effect in migraine attack treatment, comes from the high amplitude of the improvement observed in the placebo arms (28% of the patients). This figure is lower (6%) when using the harder criterium of pain free at 2 h. But these data disregard the effect of the natural course. For prophylactic treatment with oral medication, the trials performed in the last decades report an improvement in 21% of the patients in the placebo arms. However, in these studies the duration of administration was limited, the control of attacks uncertain as well as the evolution of the co-morbid psycho-pathology. Considering the reviews and meta-analysis of complex prophylactic procedures, it must be concluded that their effect is mostly linked to a placebo and non-specific psychological effects. Acupuncture may have a slight specific effect on tension type headache, but not on migraine. Manual therapy studies do not exhibit difference between manipulation, mobilization, and controls; touch has no proven specific effect. A comprehensive efficacy review of biofeedback studies concludes to a small specific effect on tension type headache but not on migraine. A review of behavioral treatment conclude to an interesting mean improvement but did not demonstrated a specific effect with the exception of a four arm study including a pseudo meditation control group. Expectation-linked placebo, conditioning, and non-specific psychological effects vary according clinical situations and psychological context; likely low in RCT, high after anempathic medical contact, and at its maximum with a desired charismatic healer. The announcements of doctors strongly influence the beliefs of patients, and in consequence their pain and anxiety sensibilities; this modulates the amplitude of the placebo and the non-specific psychological effects and is therefore a major determinant of the therapeutic success. Furthermore, any repetitive contact, even through a placebo, may interfere positively with the psychopathological co-morbidity. One has to keep in mind that the non-specific psychological interactions play a major role in the improvement of the majority of the headache sufferers.
    The Journal of Headache and Pain 02/2012; 13(3):191-8. DOI:10.1007/s10194-012-0422-0 · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "To control for this belief the placebo (dummy of pretend medicine) has been introduced (Hrobjartsson and Gotzsche 2001; Posternak and Miller 2001; Krogsboll et al. 2009). However, not knowing whether one receives an active compound or an inert substance (placebo) is in clear contrast to everyday clinical practice – and seems to diminish the response rate to the active compound in patients with major depression (Rutherford et al. 2009; Sinyor et al. 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objectives. To better evaluate the effectiveness of antidepressant drugs in the treatment of major depression in clinical practice. Methods. A simulation experiment was used to illustrate an application of marginal structural models (MSMs) via inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach in the context of non-randomized data on N = 1,000 depressed subjects, initially subjected to "watchful waiting". In simulation we assumed that subjects with worse intermediate outcome have a higher probability of being subsequently assigned to antidepressant treatment while those who receive antidepressant treatment are more likely to reach remission and less likely to reach relapse state. The outcomes from multiple (500) simulated data sets are analyzed using simple unadjusted analysis based on logistic regression and using MSM. Results. In contrast to unadjusted analysis, but consistent with the treatment assumptions, using MSM via IPTW results in strong evidence of the effectiveness of the antidepressant treatment. Furthermore MSM via IPTW substantially reduces the probability of wrongly rejecting the null hypothesis. However, the instability of weights due to the sparse data and incorrectly specified MSM may still result in inflation of Type I error rates. Conclusions. MSMs may allow evaluating the causal effects associated with antidepressant treatment from the data observed in clinical practice.
    The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry 11/2011; 14(5). DOI:10.3109/15622975.2011.619205 · 4.23 Impact Factor
Show more