4.6 Article

Placebo Adherence and Mortality in the Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
卷 125, 期 8, 页码 804-810

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.02.014

关键词

Adherence; Double-blind clinical trials; Placebo

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01 HL081195]
  2. Wyeth-Ayerst Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Analyses from double-blind randomized trials have reported lower mortality among participants who were more adherent to placebo compared with those who were less adherent. We explored this phenomenon by analyzing data from the placebo arm of the Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of estrogen plus progestin for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in postmenopausal women. Our primary aim was to measure and explain the association between adherence to placebo and total mortality among the placebo-allocated participants in the HERS. Secondary aims included assessment of the association between placebo adherence and cause-specific morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Participants with higher placebo adherence were defined as having taken at least 75% of their placebo study medication during each individual's participation in the study, whereas those with lower placebo adherence took less than 75%. The primary outcome was in-study all-cause mortality. RESULTS: More adherent participants had significantly lower total mortality compared with less adherent participants (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.93). Adjusting for available confounders did not change the magnitude or significance of the estimates. Analyses revealed that the association of higher adherence and mortality might be explained, in part, by time-dependent confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of the HERS data support a strong association between adherence to placebo study medication and mortality. Although probably not due to simple confounding by healthy lifestyle factors, the underlying mechanism for the association remains unclear. Further analyses of this association are necessary to explain this observation. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. center dot The American Journal of Medicine (2012) 125, 804-810

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据