en
Scientific article
Open access
English

How representative is a point-of-care randomized trial? Clinical outcomes of patients excluded from a point-of-care randomized controlled trial evaluating antibiotic duration for Gram-negative bacteraemia: a multicentre prospective observational cohort study

Published inClinical microbiology and infection, vol. 28, no. 2, p. 297.e1-297.e6
Publication date2022-02
First online date2021-06-08
Abstract

Objectives: Patients included in randomized controlled trials (RCT) are poorly representative of the general population. We compared outcomes of patients excluded from the PIRATE trial, a point-of-care RCT evaluating antibiotic durations for Gram-negative bacteraemia, with those of enrolled patients.

Methods: A prospective observational cohort study, 'EPCO' (Excluded Patients' Clinical Outcomes) included patients excluded from the PIRATE trial. As in PIRATE, whose patients were randomized to 7-day, 14-day, or C-reactive-protein (CRP)-guided antibiotic durations, EPCO's primary outcome was occurrence of clinical success at 30 days. We also compared baseline characteristics, outcome rates and treatment-effect estimates.

Results: In all, 405 patients were included in EPCO and compared with the 503 PIRATE patients. Reasons for exclusion were mainly medical (317/405; 78%), the most frequent being complicated infection. Excluded patients had more co-morbidities (Charlson median 3 versus 1, p < 0.001). Bacteraemia was more often health-care-associated (26% versus 9%, p < 0.001). The 30-day success rate was significantly lower among EPCO patients (299/396; 76% versus 469/493; 95%, p < 0.001), but the success rate was not significantly different for those excluded for non-medical reasons (68/75; 91%, p 0.09). There was no significant difference in failure rates of EPCO patients according to their treatment duration (difference 7 days versus 14 days: p 0.75; 7 days versus CRP-correspondent: p 1.00; 14 days versus CRP-correspondent: p 1.00).

Conclusion: Although point-of-care-randomized trials are more inclusive and representative than traditional RCTs, they are still likely to select patients with lower failure risk. Shorter antibiotic durations were not associated with failure in either included or excluded patients, supporting the generalizability of the PIRATE trial's findings.

eng
Keywords
  • Duration of antibiotic therapy
  • External validity of randomized controlled trials
  • Gram-negative bacteraemia
  • Medical ethics
  • Research methods
  • Anti-Bacterial Agents / therapeutic use
  • Bacteremia / drug therapy
  • Cohort Studies
  • Duration of Therapy
  • Humans
  • Point-of-Care Systems
Citation (ISO format)
ROSSEL, Anne et al. How representative is a point-of-care randomized trial? Clinical outcomes of patients excluded from a point-of-care randomized controlled trial evaluating antibiotic duration for Gram-negative bacteraemia: a multicentre prospective observational cohort study. In: Clinical microbiology and infection, 2022, vol. 28, n° 2, p. 297.e1–297.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.05.050
Main files (1)
Article (Published version)
accessLevelPublic
Secondary files (1)
Identifiers
ISSN of the journal1198-743X
73views
44downloads

Technical informations

Creation05/06/2022 11:46:00 AM
First validation05/06/2022 11:46:00 AM
Update time03/16/2023 8:42:56 AM
Status update03/16/2023 8:42:55 AM
Last indexation02/01/2024 9:04:53 AM
All rights reserved by Archive ouverte UNIGE and the University of GenevaunigeBlack