Outcome inconsistency in randomized controlled trials for pneumonia could create issues for interpreting data and compiling research going forward, said Alexander Mathioudakis, MD, MRCP, at the European Respiratory Society annual meeting.
Outcome inconsistency in randomized controlled trials for pneumonia could create issues for interpreting data and compiling research in meta-analyses going forward, said Alexander Mathioudakis, MD, MRCP, a clinical research fellow and honorary lecturer in respiratory medicine at the University of Manchester and Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust.
Transcript:
How do randomized controlled trials reporting on pneumonia outcomes differ from each other and which outcomes measurements are the most commonly reported?
Mathioudakis: We have looked into the outcomes reported in trials assessing the management of community acquired pneumonia, hospital acquired pneumonia, and ventilator associated pneumonia in a systematic review that is presented in the ERS 2021 International Congress. We looked at 174 ongoing or completed randomized controlled trials, which were conducted during the last decade. And we looked at about 1400 outcomes from all these trials. More specifically, we found 72 trials looking into community acquired pneumonia predominantly, and 98 trials that looked at ventilator associated pneumonia with or without the hospital acquired pneumonia as well.
Now, in all these trials, we saw that they evaluated very diverse outcomes. And that's a big problem for a few reasons. The main reason is that many trials do not assess the outcomes that are most important to patients and other stakeholders and doctors, of course, and that makes it very difficult to interpret and use in clinical practice. And the other problem is that they are not comparable. So, it's challenging for systematic reviews and meta analyses to merge their results. And it is also very challenging for clinical practice guideline developers to develop recommendations that are strong and based on high quality evidence.
Now, the outcomes that were most frequently reported in both types of trials were mortality, treatment success or failure, and adverse events. I have to say, apart from adverse events in the community acquired pneumonia trials, which were reported in about 3 quarters of the trials, all other outcomes were not reported frequently or consistently in our studies.
Finding the Right Biomarker Is Key to the TIGIT Puzzle, Experts Say
May 12th 2025Data for SKYSCRAPER-01, involving the anti-TIGIT antibody tiragolumab, align with recent bad news for this once-promising therapeutic target. But investigators involved in TIGIT studies say the problem is finding the right biomarker.
Read More
Inside the Center's MDD Value Model and Its Use of Dynamic Pricing
May 13th 2025Larragem Raines, MS, of the Center for Innovation & Value Research, discusses the organization's major depressive disorder (MDD) open-source value model, dynamic pricing, and the future role of artificial intelligence in care.
Listen
Community Oncology Reacts to Trump's Drug Pricing Executive Order
May 2nd 2025An executive order signed on Tuesday, March 15, necessitated a change in plans for this panel discussion from the 2025 Community Oncology Conference, with the assembled experts, moderated by Ted Okon, MBA, executive director of the Community Oncology Alliance, speaking to how the order would reverberate across the community oncology space.
Read More