Stopping the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Early for Efficacy

Janet Wittes, Jean-Pierre Boissel, Curt D. Furberg, Desmond G. Julian, Henri Kulbertus and Stuart Pocock
Additional contact information
Janet Wittes: Statistics Collaborative
Jean-Pierre Boissel: Claude Bernard University, Clinical Pharmacology Department
Curt D. Furberg: Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences
Desmond G. Julian: University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Henri Kulbertus: Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Cardiology Department
Stuart Pocock: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Medical Statistics Unit

Chapter Case 9 in Data Monitoring in Clinical Trials, 2006, pp 148-157 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract The Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study (RALES) was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial designed to test the hypothesis that addition of daily spironolactone to standard therapy would reduce the risk of all-cause mortality in patients with severe heart failure as a result of systolic left ventricular dysfunction. The Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) for RALES reviewed data on safety and efficacy throughout the trial using pre-specified statistical stopping boundaries for efficacy. To ensure that the data were complete, the DSMB requested successive “mortality sweeps.” At the time of these sweeps, all RALES investigators determined the vital status of participants at their clinics. Therefore, the data that the DSMB saw included a much higher percentage of the deaths than would have been observed without these sweeps. At the DSMB’s fifth meeting, the data showed 351 deaths in the placebo group and 269 in the spironolactone group for an estimated hazard ratio of 0.78 (p = 0.00018). The board recommended early termination of the trial because the observed Z-value of 3.75 exceeded the pre-specified critical value of 2.79 and the data on mortality showed consistency among subgroups and across time. The sweeps had identified 31 deaths that likely would not have been reported by the time of the meeting. Subsequent data collection identified an additional 46 deaths that had occurred by the time the study ended. Even when the endpoint of a randomized clinical trial is mortality, routine methods of data collection and reporting are unlikely to identify all events in a timely manner. The experience from RALES provides an example of the importance of active follow-up of patients to ensure that a DSMB is observing a high proportion of the events that have actually occurred.

Keywords: Severe Heart Failure; Systolic Left Ventricular Dysfunction; Calendar Time; Case Study Approach; Chronic Congestive Heart Failure (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2006
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-0-387-30107-5_13

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9780387301075

DOI: 10.1007/0-387-30107-0_13

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Springer Books from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().