Background: Allocation concealment in trials that compare interventional procedures with medical therapy is impossible. Bias introduced by the investigators when end points are adjudicated is a methodological problem in such trials. Objective: To develop and test a novel method of blinded end point adjudication in open trials. Method: In the DANAMI-2 trial, a randomised open trial comparing primary angioplasty to fibrinolytic treatment of acute myocardial infarction, end points were evaluated by an independent end point committee (EPC). The cardiologists who presented the clinical end point data to the EPC were asked not to disclose any information on the randomised treatment, in order for the EPC to pass a truly blinded end point adjudication. The EPC categorised their evaluation of each end point as evaluated blinded or evaluated not blinded. Results: Blinded end point adjudication was possible in 84% of cases. All deaths reported by local investigators were confirmed by the EPC. Local investigators reported 78 cases of reinfarction and 31 (40%) of these events were rejected by the EPC, whereas the EPC discovered 35 unreported cases of reinfarction. Thirty-one strokes were reported by local investigators of which 2 (6%) were rejected by the EPC which, however, included 2 previously unreported strokes. A total of 383 cases of bleeding were reported of which 115 (30%) were rejected, whereas the EPC included 16 another cases of unreported bleedings. Blinded end point adjudication therefore contributed significantly to the final number of end points. Conclusion: Blinded end point adjudication is feasible in open randomised trials and is likely to reduce bias.

Journal Section:
Clinical Trial
Keywords:
Blinded end point evaluation, Masked clinical data, End point committee, Open randomised trial
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2003
You do not currently have access to this content.