Study subjects and ordinary patients

R. Dowd, Robert R. Recker, R. P. Heaney

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

87 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Clinical trials of treatment agents impose strict and often necessary inclusion and exclusion criteria, while patients presenting to physicians for treatment frequently exhibit complicating features that would have excluded them from entry into study. To quantify the degree of discordance between ordinary patients and study subjects, a retrospective chart review was carried out of all new patients with osteoporosis seen in an academic medical center within a consecutive 40-month period, meeting clinical treatment criteria. Each patient chart was reviewed for the inclusion and exclusion criteria of four large, multicenter study protocols. There were 120 consecutive female patients seeking health care, with bone density T-scores below -2.0 and/or with one or more low-trauma fractures. The four trials would have accepted 4, 5, 25 and 8 of our 120 patients. The trial with the most liberal inclusion criteria would have taken only 21% of the total. Principal reasons for ineligibility were comorbidity, prior treatment with bone-active agents, and current therapy with glucocorticoids, anticoagulants and anticonvulsants. Some of these exclusions inevitably reflect the patient mix of a referral center; nevertheless, comorbidity and its therapy are common in the age range in which osteoporosis is prevalent and would, therefore, be expected to be present in patients in general medical practice as well. Thus a large fraction, perhaps the majority, of patients with diagnoses of osteoporosis who are candidates for treatment by their physicians, are not eligible for entry into typical treatment trials. The results of such trials may, therefore, have uncertain applicability to types of patients excluded, both for safety and for efficacy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)533-536
Number of pages4
JournalOsteoporosis International
Volume11
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2000

Fingerprint

Osteoporosis
Therapeutics
Comorbidity
Physicians
General Practice
Anticonvulsants
Bone Density
Anticoagulants
Glucocorticoids
Multicenter Studies
Referral and Consultation
Clinical Trials
Delivery of Health Care
Safety
Bone and Bones
Wounds and Injuries

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Study subjects and ordinary patients. / Dowd, R.; Recker, Robert R.; Heaney, R. P.

In: Osteoporosis International, Vol. 11, No. 6, 2000, p. 533-536.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dowd, R. ; Recker, Robert R. ; Heaney, R. P. / Study subjects and ordinary patients. In: Osteoporosis International. 2000 ; Vol. 11, No. 6. pp. 533-536.
@article{24df33ac6f61445fbe8aa028fa731935,
title = "Study subjects and ordinary patients",
abstract = "Clinical trials of treatment agents impose strict and often necessary inclusion and exclusion criteria, while patients presenting to physicians for treatment frequently exhibit complicating features that would have excluded them from entry into study. To quantify the degree of discordance between ordinary patients and study subjects, a retrospective chart review was carried out of all new patients with osteoporosis seen in an academic medical center within a consecutive 40-month period, meeting clinical treatment criteria. Each patient chart was reviewed for the inclusion and exclusion criteria of four large, multicenter study protocols. There were 120 consecutive female patients seeking health care, with bone density T-scores below -2.0 and/or with one or more low-trauma fractures. The four trials would have accepted 4, 5, 25 and 8 of our 120 patients. The trial with the most liberal inclusion criteria would have taken only 21{\%} of the total. Principal reasons for ineligibility were comorbidity, prior treatment with bone-active agents, and current therapy with glucocorticoids, anticoagulants and anticonvulsants. Some of these exclusions inevitably reflect the patient mix of a referral center; nevertheless, comorbidity and its therapy are common in the age range in which osteoporosis is prevalent and would, therefore, be expected to be present in patients in general medical practice as well. Thus a large fraction, perhaps the majority, of patients with diagnoses of osteoporosis who are candidates for treatment by their physicians, are not eligible for entry into typical treatment trials. The results of such trials may, therefore, have uncertain applicability to types of patients excluded, both for safety and for efficacy.",
author = "R. Dowd and Recker, {Robert R.} and Heaney, {R. P.}",
year = "2000",
doi = "10.1007/s001980070097",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "533--536",
journal = "Osteoporosis International",
issn = "0937-941X",
publisher = "Springer London",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Study subjects and ordinary patients

AU - Dowd, R.

AU - Recker, Robert R.

AU - Heaney, R. P.

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - Clinical trials of treatment agents impose strict and often necessary inclusion and exclusion criteria, while patients presenting to physicians for treatment frequently exhibit complicating features that would have excluded them from entry into study. To quantify the degree of discordance between ordinary patients and study subjects, a retrospective chart review was carried out of all new patients with osteoporosis seen in an academic medical center within a consecutive 40-month period, meeting clinical treatment criteria. Each patient chart was reviewed for the inclusion and exclusion criteria of four large, multicenter study protocols. There were 120 consecutive female patients seeking health care, with bone density T-scores below -2.0 and/or with one or more low-trauma fractures. The four trials would have accepted 4, 5, 25 and 8 of our 120 patients. The trial with the most liberal inclusion criteria would have taken only 21% of the total. Principal reasons for ineligibility were comorbidity, prior treatment with bone-active agents, and current therapy with glucocorticoids, anticoagulants and anticonvulsants. Some of these exclusions inevitably reflect the patient mix of a referral center; nevertheless, comorbidity and its therapy are common in the age range in which osteoporosis is prevalent and would, therefore, be expected to be present in patients in general medical practice as well. Thus a large fraction, perhaps the majority, of patients with diagnoses of osteoporosis who are candidates for treatment by their physicians, are not eligible for entry into typical treatment trials. The results of such trials may, therefore, have uncertain applicability to types of patients excluded, both for safety and for efficacy.

AB - Clinical trials of treatment agents impose strict and often necessary inclusion and exclusion criteria, while patients presenting to physicians for treatment frequently exhibit complicating features that would have excluded them from entry into study. To quantify the degree of discordance between ordinary patients and study subjects, a retrospective chart review was carried out of all new patients with osteoporosis seen in an academic medical center within a consecutive 40-month period, meeting clinical treatment criteria. Each patient chart was reviewed for the inclusion and exclusion criteria of four large, multicenter study protocols. There were 120 consecutive female patients seeking health care, with bone density T-scores below -2.0 and/or with one or more low-trauma fractures. The four trials would have accepted 4, 5, 25 and 8 of our 120 patients. The trial with the most liberal inclusion criteria would have taken only 21% of the total. Principal reasons for ineligibility were comorbidity, prior treatment with bone-active agents, and current therapy with glucocorticoids, anticoagulants and anticonvulsants. Some of these exclusions inevitably reflect the patient mix of a referral center; nevertheless, comorbidity and its therapy are common in the age range in which osteoporosis is prevalent and would, therefore, be expected to be present in patients in general medical practice as well. Thus a large fraction, perhaps the majority, of patients with diagnoses of osteoporosis who are candidates for treatment by their physicians, are not eligible for entry into typical treatment trials. The results of such trials may, therefore, have uncertain applicability to types of patients excluded, both for safety and for efficacy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033848392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033848392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s001980070097

DO - 10.1007/s001980070097

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 533

EP - 536

JO - Osteoporosis International

JF - Osteoporosis International

SN - 0937-941X

IS - 6

ER -