Voting with their feet (VWF) endpoint: A meta-analysis of an alternative endpoint in clinical trials, using 5-ASA induction studies in ulcerative colitis
dc.contributor.author | Rangwalla, Sujal C. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Waljee, Akbar K. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Higgins, Peter D.R. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2009-03-03T20:09:29Z | |
dc.date.available | 2010-04-14T17:40:05Z | en_US |
dc.date.issued | 2009-03 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Rangwalla, Sujal C.; Waljee, Akbar K.; Higgins, Peter D.R. (2009). "Voting with their feet (VWF) endpoint: A meta-analysis of an alternative endpoint in clinical trials, using 5-ASA induction studies in ulcerative colitis." Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 15(3): 422-428. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/61878> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1078-0998 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1536-4844 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/61878 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=19058232&dopt=citation | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Strict clinical remission endpoints in ulcerative colitis (UC) trials produce low remission rates and do not reflect the good outcomes of UC therapy. We proposed the use of the VWF (Voting With their Feet) endpoint, the percentage of subjects leaving a randomized controlled trial (RCT) arm for lack of efficacy). The aims were 1) to determine if the VWF endpoint can be extracted from 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) RCTs in UC; 2) to perform meta-analyses of VWF and clinical remission (CR) endpoints; and 3) to determine the statistical power of the VWF endpoint. Methods: Fixed effects meta-analysis and power calculations were used. Results: In 5 studies, including 1048 subjects, 9.5% of patients left 5-ASA study arms for lack of efficacy, versus 28.3% leaving placebo. The rate of failure to achieve CR was 68.2% with 5-ASA, versus 86.9% with placebo. The relative risk (RR) of treatment failure for 5-ASA using the VWF endpoint was 0.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24–0.44), which was significantly smaller than with the CR endpoint (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76–0.88). The statistical power of VWF was slightly greater than CR. Conclusions: VWF is inexpensive, intuitive, and has similar statistical power to CR. The VWF endpoint can confirm the validity of outcome measures in clinical trials, and estimate real-world clinical efficacy. (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008) | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 154742 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3118 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.publisher | Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Life and Medical Sciences | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Surgery | en_US |
dc.title | Voting with their feet (VWF) endpoint: A meta-analysis of an alternative endpoint in clinical trials, using 5-ASA induction studies in ulcerative colitis | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.robots | IndexNoFollow | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Internal Medicine and Specialties | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan ; 6520 MSRB I, Box 0682, 1150 W. Medical Center Dr., Ann Arbor, MI 48109 | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 19058232 | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61878/1/20786_ftp.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/ibd.20786 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Inflammatory Bowel Diseases | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
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.