Should contemporary rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials be more like standard patient care and vice versa?
Open Access
- 1 November 2004
- journal article
- review article
- Published by BMJ in Annals Of The Rheumatic Diseases
- Vol. 63 (suppl_2), ii32-ii39
- https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2004.028415
Abstract
The information used by rheumatologists when delivering care to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is derived mainly from two sources: randomised controlled clinical trials and experience in clinical care. However, these two sources differ significantly because (a) the extensive inclusion and exclusion criteria result in clinical trial participants being recruited from only a minority of patients seen in standard clinical care; (b) assessments in clinical trials are conducted according to standard quantitative measures and indices, while standard clinical care of most patients with RA is generally conducted empirically, without collection of any quantitative data other than laboratory tests to estimate prognosis and document change in status; and (c) although baseline databases of various clinical trials (and observational studies) are 60–90% identical in content, they are not standardised and therefore not amenable to direct comparisons. Strategies to promote similarities between clinical trials and standard clinical care in patients with RA may include: more generalised inclusion criteria; incorporation of quantitative measurement into standard care, easily accomplished by asking each patient to complete a simple questionnaire at each visit to a rheumatologist; and consensus among rheumatologists for databases with standard content and format in clinical care and research involving patients with RA.Keywords
This publication has 76 references indexed in Scilit:
- An index of the three core data set patient questionnaire measures distinguishes efficacy of active treatment from that of placebo as effectively as the American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria (ACR20) or the Disease Activity Score (DAS) in a rheumatoid arthritis clinical trialArthritis & Rheumatism, 2003
- Etanercept versus methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: Two‐year radiographic and clinical outcomesArthritis & Rheumatism, 2002
- The American college of rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trialsArthritis & Rheumatism, 1993
- Radiographic and joint count findings of the hand in rheumatoid arthritis. related and unrelated findingsArthritis & Rheumatism, 1988
- Determining Optimal Therapy — Randomized Trials in Individual PatientsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1986
- Bias in Treatment Assignment in Controlled Clinical TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1983
- The Competing Objectives of Randomized TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1980
- Measurement of patient outcome in arthritisArthritis & Rheumatism, 1980
- Controversy in Counting and Attributing Events in Clinical TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1979
- The Importance of Beta, the Type II Error and Sample Size in the Design and Interpretation of the Randomized Control TrialNew England Journal of Medicine, 1978