Generalization of the results of clinical studies through the analysis of subgroups

• Autor(a) principal: Costa, João
• Data de Publicação: 2012
• Outros Autores: Fareleira, Filipa, Ascensão, Raquel, Vaz Carneiro, António
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: https://www.actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/16

Subgroup analysis in clinical trials are usually performed to define the potential heterogeneity of treatment effect in relation with the baseline risk, physiopathology, practical application of therapy or the under-utilization in clinical practice of effective interventions due to uncertainties of its benefit/risk ratio. When appropriately planned, subgroup analysis are a valid methodology the define benefits in subgroups of patients, thus providing good quality evidence to support clinical decision making. However, in order to be correct, subgroup analysis should be defined a priori, done in small numbers, should be fully reported and, most important, must endure statistical tests for interaction. In this paper we present an example of the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporosis, in which the benefits of an intervention (the higher the fracture risk is, the better the benefit is) with a specific agent (bazedoxifene) was only disclosed after a post-hoc analysis of the initial global trial sample.