1. The Fragility Index in a Cohort of HIV/AIDS Randomized Controlled Trials
- Author
-
Mousumi Som, Chase Meyer, Damon Baker, Rebecca Gupton, Matt Vassar, and Cole Wayant
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Abstracting and Indexing ,01 natural sciences ,law.invention ,Cohort Studies ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Fragility ,Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) ,Randomized controlled trial ,law ,Statistical significance ,Internal medicine ,Internal Medicine ,Humans ,Medicine ,030212 general & internal medicine ,0101 mathematics ,Original Research ,Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ,Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome ,business.industry ,010102 general mathematics ,Guideline ,medicine.disease ,Clinical trial ,Sample size determination ,Cohort ,business - Abstract
HIV/AIDS is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and financial burden. For these reasons, robust clinical evidence is critical. We aim to investigate the fragility index, fragility quotient, and risk of bias of clinical trial endpoints in HIV medicine. The fragility index represents the minimum amount of trial endpoint “nonevents” changed to “events” in one trial arm required to nullify statistical significance. The fragility quotient contextualized the fragility index by dividing the index by the total trial sample size. We selected eligible trials from the Department of Health and Human Services guideline for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected adults and adolescents. We calculated the fragility index and fragility quotient for all included trials. The Cochrane “risk of bias” Tool 2.0 was used to evaluate the likelihood and sources of bias in the included trials. Thirty-nine RCTs were included for our analysis of fragility. Thirty-six were included for our analysis of the risk of bias. The median fragility index was 5. Three RCTs were at high risk of bias, all due to the selection of the endpoint or statistical test. Twenty had some concerns for risk of bias. The analyzed HIV medicine RCT endpoints were fragile, overall. This indicates that a median of 5 patients across all included studies would nullify the statistical significance of the endpoints. Furthermore, we found evidence that concerns for bias are present at a high rate. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-019-04928-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF