Results from a Blind and a Non-blind Randomised Trial Run in Parallel: Experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial

Overview

Journal BMC Med Res Methodol

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties General Medicine
Health Services

Date 2012 Apr 6

PMID 22475112

Citations 5

Authors

Piret Veerus

Krista Fischer

Matti Hakama

Elina Hemminki

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial assigned 4170 potential participants prior to recruitment to blind or non-blind hormone therapy (HT), with placebo or non-treatment the respective alternatives. Before having to decide on participation, women were told whether they had been randomised to the blind or non-blind trial. Eligible women who were still willing to join the trial were recruited. After recruitment participants in the non-blind trial (N = 1001) received open-label HT or no treatment, participants in the blind trial (N = 777) remained blinded until the end of the trial. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effect of blinding on internal and external validity of trial outcomes.

Methods: Effect of blinding was calculated as the hazard ratio of selected chronic diseases, total mortality and all outcomes. For analysing the effect of blinding on external validity, the hazard ratios from women recruited to the placebo arm and to the non-treatment arm were compared with those not recruited; for analysing the effect of blinding on internal validity, the hazard ratios from the blind trial were compared with those from the non-blind trial.

Results: The women recruited to the placebo arm had less cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.43; 95% CI: 0.26-0.71) and all outcomes combined (HR 0.76; 95% CI: 0.63-0.91) than those who were not recruited. Among women recruited or not recruited to the non-treatment arm, no differences were observed for any of the outcomes studied.Among women recruited to the trial, the risk for coronary heart disease events (HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64-0.93), cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.66; 95%CI: 0.47-0.92), and all outcomes combined (HR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) was smaller among participants in the blind trial than in the non-blind trial. There was no difference between the blind and the non-blind trial for total cancer (HR 0.95; 95% CI: 0.64-1.42), bone fractures (0.93; 95% CI: 0.74-1.16), and total mortality (HR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.53-1.98).

Conclusions: The results from blind and non-blind trials may differ, even if the target population is the same. Blinding may influence both internal and external validity. The effect of blinding may vary for different outcome events.

Trial Registration: [ISRCTN35338757].

Citing Articles

Effects of Estrogen on Cardiac mRNA and LncRNA Expression Profiles in Hypertensive Mice.

Zhu J, Wang H, Chen H J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2020; 14(4):706-727.

PMID: 32236843 DOI: 10.1007/s12265-020-09990-7.

Pure intervention effect or effect in routine health care - blinded or non-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Malmivaara A BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018; 18(1):91.

PMID: 30170553 PMC: 6119259. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0549-z.

Patient safety during procedural sedation using capnography monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Saunders R, Struys M, Pollock R, Mestek M, Lightdale J BMJ Open. 2017; 7(6):e013402.

PMID: 28667196 PMC: 5734204. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013402.

Effect of characteristics of women on attendance in blind and non-blind randomised trials: analysis of recruitment data from the EPHT Trial.

Veerus P, Fischer K, Hemminki E, Hovi S, Hakama M BMJ Open. 2016; 6(10):e011099.

PMID: 27797984 PMC: 5073501. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011099.

Non-cancer morbidity among Estonian Chernobyl cleanup workers: a register-based cohort study.

Rahu K, Bromet E, Hakulinen T, Auvinen A, Uuskula A, Rahu M BMJ Open. 2014; 4(5):e004516.

PMID: 24833681 PMC: 4024594. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004516.

References

Bramer G . International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. Tenth revision. World Health Stat Q. 1988; 41(1):32-6. View

Veerus P, Fischer K, Hovi S, Hakama M, Rahu M, Hemminki E . Postmenopausal hormone therapy increases use of health services: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy Trial [ISRCTN35338757]. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 195(1):62-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.12.037. View

Black N . Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ. 1996; 312(7040):1215-8. PMC: 2350940. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.312.7040.1215. View

Flemming D . Value in the placebo response. BMJ. 2008; 337:a2685. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.a2685. View

Vorobjov S, Hovi S, Veerus P, Pisarev H, Rahu M, Hemminki E . Treatment adherence in the Estonian postmenopausal hormone therapy (EPHT) trial [ISRCTN35338757]. Maturitas. 2005; 52(3-4):286-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2005.05.001. View

Dekkers O, von Elm E, Algra A, Romijn J, Vandenbroucke J . How to assess the external validity of therapeutic trials: a conceptual approach. Int J Epidemiol. 2009; 39(1):89-94. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyp174. View

Shapiro S . Risks of estrogen plus progestin therapy: a sensitivity analysis of findings in the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. Climacteric. 2004; 6(4):302-10. View

SILVERMAN W, Altman D . Patients' preferences and randomised trials. Lancet. 1996; 347(8995):171-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(96)90347-5. View

Veerus P, Fischer K, Hovi S, Karro H, Hemminki E . Does hormone replacement therapy affect the use of prescription medicines in postmenopausal women: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy Trial [ISRCTN35338757]. BJOG. 2007; 114(5):548-54. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01292.x. View

10.

Lang K, Magi M, Aareleid T . Study of completeness of registration at the Estonian cancer registry. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2003; 12(2):153-6. DOI: 10.1097/00008469-200304000-00009. View

11.

Rothwell P . Commentary: External validity of results of randomized trials: disentangling a complex concept. Int J Epidemiol. 2009; 39(1):94-6. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyp305. View

12.

Hemminki E, Hovi S, Veerus P, Sevon T, Tuimala R, Rahu M . Blinding decreased recruitment in a prevention trial of postmenopausal hormone therapy. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004; 57(12):1237-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.04.009. View

13.

Altman D, Bland J . Statistics notes. Treatment allocation in controlled trials: why randomise?. BMJ. 1999; 318(7192):1209. PMC: 1115595. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.318.7192.1209. View

14.

Veerus P, Hovi S, Fischer K, Rahu M, Hakama M, Hemminki E . Results from the Estonian postmenopausal hormone therapy trial [ISRCTN35338757]. Maturitas. 2006; 55(2):162-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2006.01.012. View

15.

Moher D, Jadad A, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S . Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995; 16(1):62-73. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(94)00031-w. View

16.

Rothwell P . External validity of randomised controlled trials: "to whom do the results of this trial apply?". Lancet. 2005; 365(9453):82-93. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17670-8. View

17.

Day S, Altman D . Statistics notes: blinding in clinical trials and other studies. BMJ. 2000; 321(7259):504. PMC: 1118396. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.321.7259.504. View

18.

Halpern S . Evaluating preference effects in partially unblinded, randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003; 56(2):109-15. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(02)00598-x. View

19.

Altman D . Randomisation. BMJ. 1991; 302(6791):1481-2. PMC: 1670173. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.302.6791.1481. View

20.

Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, MacDonald S, Delva D, Birtwhistle R . Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003; 3:28. PMC: 317298. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-3-28. View