The Placebo Effect in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Q1 Medicine
Daniel Caldeira, Daniel Inácio Cazeiro, Rui Plácido, Filipa Ferreira, Rita Calé, Fausto J Pinto
{"title":"The Placebo Effect in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Daniel Caldeira, Daniel Inácio Cazeiro, Rui Plácido, Filipa Ferreira, Rita Calé, Fausto J Pinto","doi":"10.3390/medsci13020057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Placebo-controlled studies are crucial in clinical trials, but the placebo effect can vary across conditions. We aimed to assess the placebo effect in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) trials. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a systematic review and included randomized placebo-controlled trials investigating CTEPH interventions. Primary outcomes were the pre-post changes in the 6 min walk test (6MWT) and quality of life in the placebo arms. Secondary outcomes included mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), cardiac index, and NT-proBNP levels. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. <b>Results:</b> Seven trials with 270 CTEPH patients in placebo arms were analyzed. The average 6MWT change was not significant (-1.31 m; 95%CI -12.49 to +9.79). Quality of life with EQ-5D was not significantly improved (-0.04; 95%CI -0.10 to +0.02). mPAP, PVR, cardiac index, and NT-proBNP also demonstrated non-significant changes with small magnitudes. <b>Conclusions:</b> The placebo effect in CTEPH trials was not statistically significant and had small magnitude but should not discourage the use of placebo-controlled trials where applicable and ethical.</p>","PeriodicalId":74152,"journal":{"name":"Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":"13 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12101364/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/medsci13020057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Placebo-controlled studies are crucial in clinical trials, but the placebo effect can vary across conditions. We aimed to assess the placebo effect in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) trials. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and included randomized placebo-controlled trials investigating CTEPH interventions. Primary outcomes were the pre-post changes in the 6 min walk test (6MWT) and quality of life in the placebo arms. Secondary outcomes included mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), cardiac index, and NT-proBNP levels. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. Results: Seven trials with 270 CTEPH patients in placebo arms were analyzed. The average 6MWT change was not significant (-1.31 m; 95%CI -12.49 to +9.79). Quality of life with EQ-5D was not significantly improved (-0.04; 95%CI -0.10 to +0.02). mPAP, PVR, cardiac index, and NT-proBNP also demonstrated non-significant changes with small magnitudes. Conclusions: The placebo effect in CTEPH trials was not statistically significant and had small magnitude but should not discourage the use of placebo-controlled trials where applicable and ethical.

慢性血栓栓塞性肺动脉高压试验中的安慰剂效应:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
简介:安慰剂对照研究在临床试验中是至关重要的,但安慰剂效应在不同的条件下会有所不同。我们的目的是评估慢性血栓栓塞性肺动脉高压(CTEPH)试验中的安慰剂效应。方法:我们进行了一项系统综述,并纳入了调查CTEPH干预措施的随机安慰剂对照试验。主要结局是6分钟步行试验(6MWT)的前后变化和安慰剂组的生活质量。次要结局包括平均肺动脉压(mPAP)、肺血管阻力(PVR)、心脏指数和NT-proBNP水平。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析。结果:我们分析了安慰剂组270例CTEPH患者的7项试验。平均6MWT变化不显著(-1.31 m;95%CI -12.49 ~ +9.79)。EQ-5D患者的生活质量无显著改善(-0.04;95%CI -0.10 ~ +0.02)。mPAP、PVR、心脏指数和NT-proBNP也表现出小幅度的无显著变化。结论:CTEPH试验中的安慰剂效应在统计学上不显著,且规模较小,但不应阻碍在适用和符合伦理的情况下使用安慰剂对照试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信