Show simple item record

Physicians' Preferences for Active-controlled versus Placebo-controlled Trials of New Antihypertensive Drugs

dc.contributor.authorHalpern, Scott D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorUbel, Peter A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBerlin, Jesse A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorTownsend, Raymond R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorAsch, David A.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T20:10:45Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T20:10:45Z
dc.date.issued2002-09en_US
dc.identifier.citationHalpern, Scott D.; Ubel, Peter A.; Berlin, Jesse A.; Townsend, Raymond R.; Asch, David A. (2002). "Physicians' Preferences for Active-controlled versus Placebo-controlled Trials of New Antihypertensive Drugs." Journal of General Internal Medicine 17(9): 689-695. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/73302>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0884-8734en_US
dc.identifier.issn1525-1497en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/73302
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=12220365&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractTo evaluate physicians' preferences for referring patients to, and using information from, active-controlled trials (ACTs) versus placebo-controlled trials (PCTs) of new antihypertensive drugs. DESIGN AND SETTING Nationwide mailed survey, with telephone contact of nonresponders to assess nonresponse bias. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand two hundred primary care physicians randomly selected from the American Medical Association's Master File. Of 1,154 physicians eligible to respond, 651 (56.4%) returned completed questionnaires. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured physicians' stated willingness to encourage hypertensive patients to enroll in ACTs and PCTs of new antihypertensive drugs, their views of the relative merits of ACTs versus PCTs, their stated willingness to prescribe new drugs tested in ACTs or PCTs, and their views regarding the overall justifiability of the 2 designs. Physicians were significantly more likely to indicate they would encourage their patients to enroll in ACTs than in PCTs ( P < .0001). Physicians thought ACTs provided more valuable information for their practices, were more likely to lead to a public health benefit, offered enrolled patients greater opportunity for personal benefit, and were less likely to expose enrolled patients to unnecessary risks (all P < .0001). Physicians were more likely to prescribe new drugs that had been compared in ACTs ( P < .0001), and viewed ACTs as a more justifiable method for testing new antihypertensive drugs ( P < .0001). There was no evidence of nonresponse bias for these main results. CONCLUSIONS: Although PCTs remain the standard method for testing new antihypertensive drugs, physicians strongly prefer ACTs. Using ACTs to test new antihypertensive drugs may enhance the efficiency of patient recruitment and more strongly influence physicians' prescribing practices.en_US
dc.format.extent308294 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Science Incen_US
dc.rights2002 by the Society of General Internal Medicineen_US
dc.subject.otherClinical Trialsen_US
dc.subject.otherPlacebo-controlled Trialsen_US
dc.subject.otherAntihypertensive Drugsen_US
dc.subject.otherPhysicians' Preferencesen_US
dc.subject.otherEthicsen_US
dc.titlePhysicians' Preferences for Active-controlled versus Placebo-controlled Trials of New Antihypertensive Drugsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelInternal Medicine and Specialtiesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumReceived from the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (SDH, JAB, DAA), Center for Bioethics (SDH, DAA), Center for Education and Research on Therapeutics (SDH, JAB), Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (PAU, DAA), Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine (RRT), and the Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pa (DAA); Ann Arbor Veterans Affairs Medical Center (PAU), Division of General Internal Medicine (PAU), University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, Mich.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid12220365en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73302/1/j.1525-1497.2002.11024.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.11024.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of General Internal Medicineen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWeber MA. The ethics of using placebo in hypertension clinical trials. J Hypertens. 1999; 17: 5 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKisch ES. Is the use of placebo in antihypertensive drug studies ethical? J Hypertens. 1999; 17: 147 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePreston RA, Materson BJ, Reda DJ, Williams DW. Placebo-associated blood pressure response and adverse effects in the treatment of hypertension. Arch Intern Med. 2000; 160: 1449 – 54.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalpern SD, Karlawish JHT. Placebo-controlled trials are unethical in clinical hypertension research. Arch Intern Med. 2000; 160: 3167 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEllenberg SS, Temple R. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments. Part 2: practical issues and specific cases. Ann Intern Med. 2000; 133: 464 – 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTemple RJ. When are clinical trials of a given agent vs. placebo no longer appropriate or feasible? Control Clin Trials. 1997; 18: 613 – 20.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTemple R, Ellenberg SS. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments. Part 1: ethical and scientific issues. Ann Intern Med. 2000; 133: 455 – 63.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKass EH. Ethical considerations in the planning of hypertension treatment trials. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1978; 304: 412 – 23.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFeinstein AR. An additional basic science for clinical medicine: II. The limitations of randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 1983; 99: 544 – 50.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKramer MS, Shapiro SH. Scientific challenges in the application of randomized trials. JAMA. 1984; 252 ( 19 ): 2739 – 45.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKorn EL, Baumrind S, Randomised clinical trials with clinician-preferred treatment. Lancet. 1991; 337: 149 – 52.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHennekens CH, Buring JE. Validity versus generalizability in clinical trial design and conduct. J Card Fail. 1998; 4 ( 3 ): 239 – 40.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalpern SD, Metzger DS, Berlin JA, Ubel PA. Who will enroll? Predicting participation in a phase II AIDS vaccine trial. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2001; 27: 281 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJones B, Jarvis P, Lewis JA, Ebbutt AF. Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rigorous methods. BMJ. 1996; 313: 36 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFleming TR. Design and interpretation of equivalence trials. Am Heart J. 2000; 139: S171 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFreedman B. Scientific value and validity as ethical requirements for research: a proposed explication. IRB: Rev Hum Subjects Res. 1987; 9: 7 – 10.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEmmanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA. 2000; 283: 2701 – 11.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWelton AJ, Vickers MR, Cooper JA, Meade TW, Marteau TM. Is recruitment more difficult with a placebo arm in randomised controlled trials? A quasirandomised, interview based study. BMJ. 1999; 318: 1114 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference19. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: E 10. Choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services; 2001.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchoenberger JA. Ethical considerations in the planning of hypertension treatment trials. Discussion. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1978; 304: 420 – 1.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalpern SD, Ubel PA, Berlin JA, Asch DA. A randomized trial of $5 versus $10 monetary incentives, envelope size, and candy to increase physician response rates to mailed questionnaires. Med Care. In press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchlesselman JJ. Case-Control Studies: Design, Conduct, Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press; 1982.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor KM, Margolese RG, Soskolne CL. Physicians' reasons for not entering eligible patients in a randomized clinical trial of adjuvant surgery for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1984; 310: 1363 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBenson AB, Pregler JP, Bean JA, et al. Oncologists' reluctance to accrue patients onto clinical trials: an Illinois Cancer Center study. J Clin Oncol. 1991; 9: 2067 – 75.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor KM. Integrating conflicting professional roles: physician participation in randomized clinical trials. Soc Sci Med. 1992; 35: 217 – 24.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor KM. Physician participation in a randomized clinical trial for ocular melanoma. Ann Ophthalmol. 1992; 24: 337 – 44.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTaylor KM, Feldstein ML, Skeel RT, Pandya KJ, Ng P, Carbone PP. Fundamental dilemmas of the randomized clinical trial process: results of a survey of the 1,737 Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group investigators. J Clin Oncol. 1994; 12: 1796 – 805.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVastag B. Breast cancer prevention study aims to overcome drug bias. JAMA. 2001; 285: 399 – 400.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMac Intyre IMC. Tribulations for clinical trials. Poor recruitment is hampering research. BMJ. 1991; 302: 1099 – 100.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePeabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P, Dresselhaus TR, Lee M. Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: A prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. JAMA. 2000; 283: 1715 – 22.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMisbin RI. Placebo-controlled trials in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2001; 24: 773 – 4.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChmura Kraemer H. Statistical analysis to settle ethical issues. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000; 57: 327 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMichels KB. The placebo problem remains. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000; 57: 321 – 2.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBoissel J-P. Impact of randomized clinical trials on medical practice. Control Clin Trials. 1989; 10: 120S – 34S.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBoyle PJ, Callahan D. Physicians' use of outcomes data: moral conflicts and potential resolutions. In: Boyle PJ, ed. Getting Doctors to Listen: Ethics and Outcomes Data in Context. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 1998: 3 – 20.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBerlowitz DR, Ash AS, Hickey EC, et al. Inadequate management of blood pressure in a hypertensive population. N Engl J Med. 1998; 339: 1957 – 63.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrown MJ, Palmer CR, Castaigne A. Morbidity and mortality in patients randomised to double-blind treatment with a long-acting calcium-channel blocker or diuretic in the International Nifedipine GITS study: intervention as a goal in hypertension treatment (INSIGHT). Lancet. 2000; 356: 366 – 72.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHansson L, Hedner T, Lund-Johansen P, et al. Randomised trial of effects of calcium antagonists compared with diuretics and beta-blockers on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Nordic Diltiazem (NORDIL) study. Lancet. 2000; 356: 359 – 65.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.