Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol

Background In the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP‐ICU) trial, 3291 adult ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding were randomly allocated to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg or placebo once daily in the ICU. No difference was observed between the groups in the p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2019-10, Vol.63 (9), p.1251-1256
Hauptverfasser: Granholm, Anders, Marker, Søren, Krag, Mette, Zampieri, Fernando G., Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian, Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S., Horst, Iwan C. C., Lange, Theis, Wetterslev, Jørn, Perner, Anders, Møller, Morten H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1256
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1251
container_title Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
container_volume 63
creator Granholm, Anders
Marker, Søren
Krag, Mette
Zampieri, Fernando G.
Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian
Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S.
Horst, Iwan C. C.
Lange, Theis
Wetterslev, Jørn
Perner, Anders
Møller, Morten H.
description Background In the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP‐ICU) trial, 3291 adult ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding were randomly allocated to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg or placebo once daily in the ICU. No difference was observed between the groups in the primary outcome 90‐day mortality or the secondary outcomes, except for clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding. However, heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) not detected by conventional subgroup analyses could be present. Methods This is a protocol and statistical analysis plan for a secondary, post hoc, exploratory analysis of the SUP‐ICU trial. We will explore HTE in one set of subgroups based on severity of illness (using the Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II) and another set of subgroups based on the total number of risk factors for GI bleeding in each patient using Bayesian hierarchical models. We will summarise posterior probability distributions using medians and 95% credible intervals and present probabilities for different levels of benefit and harm of the intervention in each subgroup. Finally, we will assess if the treatment effect interacts with SAPS II and the number of risk factors separately on the continuous scale using marginal effects plots. Conclusions The outlined post hoc analysis will explore whether HTE was present in the SUP‐ICU trial and may help answer some of the remaining questions regarding the balance between benefits and harms of pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk of GI bleeding. ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02467621.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/aas.13432
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2261279594</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2284923363</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-18cc2626a0d4301caef26e7ce42dcf4aea96b82ccbfc4837efe0ba67637f55b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kT9PwzAQxS0EoqUw8AWQJRYYUmI7sRO2qOJPpUoMwBw57hlSuXGxHUG-PS4FBiS8nPz0u3f2PYROSTol8VxJ6aeEZYzuoTFhZZnwXPB9NE7TlCQ5EXSEjrxfxSvLyvIQjRhhlAhBxsjcQwBnX6CDNgzYahwcyLCGLmDQGlTYaj6K3uPeKHB44-zmdTDyo_W47fB89ow3MrSxw1_jCntQtltKN2DZSTP4SMWOYJU1x-hAS-Ph5LtO0NPtzdPsPlk83M1n1SJRrChoQgqlKKdcpsuMpURJ0JSDUJDRpdKZBFnypqBKNVplBROgIW0kF5wJnecNm6CLnW2c-9aDD_W69QqMkR3Y3teUckJFmZdZRM__oCvbu_juLVVkJWWMs0hd7ijlrPcOdL1x7Tp-sSZpvU2gjgnUXwlE9uzbsW_WsPwlf1Yegasd8N4aGP53qqvqcWf5CYRhkRM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2284923363</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Granholm, Anders ; Marker, Søren ; Krag, Mette ; Zampieri, Fernando G. ; Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian ; Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S. ; Horst, Iwan C. C. ; Lange, Theis ; Wetterslev, Jørn ; Perner, Anders ; Møller, Morten H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Granholm, Anders ; Marker, Søren ; Krag, Mette ; Zampieri, Fernando G. ; Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian ; Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S. ; Horst, Iwan C. C. ; Lange, Theis ; Wetterslev, Jørn ; Perner, Anders ; Møller, Morten H.</creatorcontrib><description>Background In the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP‐ICU) trial, 3291 adult ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding were randomly allocated to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg or placebo once daily in the ICU. No difference was observed between the groups in the primary outcome 90‐day mortality or the secondary outcomes, except for clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding. However, heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) not detected by conventional subgroup analyses could be present. Methods This is a protocol and statistical analysis plan for a secondary, post hoc, exploratory analysis of the SUP‐ICU trial. We will explore HTE in one set of subgroups based on severity of illness (using the Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II) and another set of subgroups based on the total number of risk factors for GI bleeding in each patient using Bayesian hierarchical models. We will summarise posterior probability distributions using medians and 95% credible intervals and present probabilities for different levels of benefit and harm of the intervention in each subgroup. Finally, we will assess if the treatment effect interacts with SAPS II and the number of risk factors separately on the continuous scale using marginal effects plots. Conclusions The outlined post hoc analysis will explore whether HTE was present in the SUP‐ICU trial and may help answer some of the remaining questions regarding the balance between benefits and harms of pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk of GI bleeding. ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02467621.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-5172</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1399-6576</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/aas.13432</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31321771</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Bayesian analysis ; Bleeding ; Conditional probability ; Heterogeneity ; Intravenous administration ; Mathematical models ; Prophylaxis ; Risk analysis ; Risk factors ; Secondary analysis ; Statistical analysis ; Subgroups ; Ulcers</subject><ispartof>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2019-10, Vol.63 (9), p.1251-1256</ispartof><rights>2019 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2019 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-18cc2626a0d4301caef26e7ce42dcf4aea96b82ccbfc4837efe0ba67637f55b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-18cc2626a0d4301caef26e7ce42dcf4aea96b82ccbfc4837efe0ba67637f55b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1023-0371 ; 0000-0003-3602-4541 ; 0000-0003-3891-8522 ; 0000-0002-6378-9673 ; 0000-0001-5799-7655 ; 0000-0002-4668-0123</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Faas.13432$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Faas.13432$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31321771$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Granholm, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marker, Søren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krag, Mette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zampieri, Fernando G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horst, Iwan C. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lange, Theis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wetterslev, Jørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perner, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Møller, Morten H.</creatorcontrib><title>Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol</title><title>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</title><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol Scand</addtitle><description>Background In the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP‐ICU) trial, 3291 adult ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding were randomly allocated to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg or placebo once daily in the ICU. No difference was observed between the groups in the primary outcome 90‐day mortality or the secondary outcomes, except for clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding. However, heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) not detected by conventional subgroup analyses could be present. Methods This is a protocol and statistical analysis plan for a secondary, post hoc, exploratory analysis of the SUP‐ICU trial. We will explore HTE in one set of subgroups based on severity of illness (using the Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II) and another set of subgroups based on the total number of risk factors for GI bleeding in each patient using Bayesian hierarchical models. We will summarise posterior probability distributions using medians and 95% credible intervals and present probabilities for different levels of benefit and harm of the intervention in each subgroup. Finally, we will assess if the treatment effect interacts with SAPS II and the number of risk factors separately on the continuous scale using marginal effects plots. Conclusions The outlined post hoc analysis will explore whether HTE was present in the SUP‐ICU trial and may help answer some of the remaining questions regarding the balance between benefits and harms of pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk of GI bleeding. ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02467621.</description><subject>Bayesian analysis</subject><subject>Bleeding</subject><subject>Conditional probability</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Intravenous administration</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Prophylaxis</subject><subject>Risk analysis</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Secondary analysis</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Subgroups</subject><subject>Ulcers</subject><issn>0001-5172</issn><issn>1399-6576</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kT9PwzAQxS0EoqUw8AWQJRYYUmI7sRO2qOJPpUoMwBw57hlSuXGxHUG-PS4FBiS8nPz0u3f2PYROSTol8VxJ6aeEZYzuoTFhZZnwXPB9NE7TlCQ5EXSEjrxfxSvLyvIQjRhhlAhBxsjcQwBnX6CDNgzYahwcyLCGLmDQGlTYaj6K3uPeKHB44-zmdTDyo_W47fB89ow3MrSxw1_jCntQtltKN2DZSTP4SMWOYJU1x-hAS-Ph5LtO0NPtzdPsPlk83M1n1SJRrChoQgqlKKdcpsuMpURJ0JSDUJDRpdKZBFnypqBKNVplBROgIW0kF5wJnecNm6CLnW2c-9aDD_W69QqMkR3Y3teUckJFmZdZRM__oCvbu_juLVVkJWWMs0hd7ijlrPcOdL1x7Tp-sSZpvU2gjgnUXwlE9uzbsW_WsPwlf1Yegasd8N4aGP53qqvqcWf5CYRhkRM</recordid><startdate>201910</startdate><enddate>201910</enddate><creator>Granholm, Anders</creator><creator>Marker, Søren</creator><creator>Krag, Mette</creator><creator>Zampieri, Fernando G.</creator><creator>Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian</creator><creator>Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S.</creator><creator>Horst, Iwan C. C.</creator><creator>Lange, Theis</creator><creator>Wetterslev, Jørn</creator><creator>Perner, Anders</creator><creator>Møller, Morten H.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1023-0371</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3602-4541</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3891-8522</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6378-9673</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5799-7655</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4668-0123</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201910</creationdate><title>Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol</title><author>Granholm, Anders ; Marker, Søren ; Krag, Mette ; Zampieri, Fernando G. ; Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian ; Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S. ; Horst, Iwan C. C. ; Lange, Theis ; Wetterslev, Jørn ; Perner, Anders ; Møller, Morten H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3882-18cc2626a0d4301caef26e7ce42dcf4aea96b82ccbfc4837efe0ba67637f55b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Bayesian analysis</topic><topic>Bleeding</topic><topic>Conditional probability</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Intravenous administration</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Prophylaxis</topic><topic>Risk analysis</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Secondary analysis</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Subgroups</topic><topic>Ulcers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Granholm, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marker, Søren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krag, Mette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zampieri, Fernando G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horst, Iwan C. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lange, Theis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wetterslev, Jørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perner, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Møller, Morten H.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Granholm, Anders</au><au>Marker, Søren</au><au>Krag, Mette</au><au>Zampieri, Fernando G.</au><au>Thorsen‐Meyer, Hans‐Christian</au><au>Kaas‐Hansen, Benjamin S.</au><au>Horst, Iwan C. C.</au><au>Lange, Theis</au><au>Wetterslev, Jørn</au><au>Perner, Anders</au><au>Møller, Morten H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol</atitle><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol Scand</addtitle><date>2019-10</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>63</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1251</spage><epage>1256</epage><pages>1251-1256</pages><issn>0001-5172</issn><eissn>1399-6576</eissn><abstract>Background In the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP‐ICU) trial, 3291 adult ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding were randomly allocated to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg or placebo once daily in the ICU. No difference was observed between the groups in the primary outcome 90‐day mortality or the secondary outcomes, except for clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding. However, heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) not detected by conventional subgroup analyses could be present. Methods This is a protocol and statistical analysis plan for a secondary, post hoc, exploratory analysis of the SUP‐ICU trial. We will explore HTE in one set of subgroups based on severity of illness (using the Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II) and another set of subgroups based on the total number of risk factors for GI bleeding in each patient using Bayesian hierarchical models. We will summarise posterior probability distributions using medians and 95% credible intervals and present probabilities for different levels of benefit and harm of the intervention in each subgroup. Finally, we will assess if the treatment effect interacts with SAPS II and the number of risk factors separately on the continuous scale using marginal effects plots. Conclusions The outlined post hoc analysis will explore whether HTE was present in the SUP‐ICU trial and may help answer some of the remaining questions regarding the balance between benefits and harms of pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk of GI bleeding. ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02467621.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>31321771</pmid><doi>10.1111/aas.13432</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1023-0371</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3602-4541</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3891-8522</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6378-9673</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5799-7655</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4668-0123</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0001-5172
ispartof Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2019-10, Vol.63 (9), p.1251-1256
issn 0001-5172
1399-6576
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2261279594
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Bayesian analysis
Bleeding
Conditional probability
Heterogeneity
Intravenous administration
Mathematical models
Prophylaxis
Risk analysis
Risk factors
Secondary analysis
Statistical analysis
Subgroups
Ulcers
title Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T11%3A24%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Heterogeneity%20of%20treatment%20effect%20of%20stress%20ulcer%20prophylaxis%20in%20ICU%20patients:%20A%20secondary%20analysis%20protocol&rft.jtitle=Acta%20anaesthesiologica%20Scandinavica&rft.au=Granholm,%20Anders&rft.date=2019-10&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1251&rft.epage=1256&rft.pages=1251-1256&rft.issn=0001-5172&rft.eissn=1399-6576&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/aas.13432&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2284923363%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2284923363&rft_id=info:pmid/31321771&rfr_iscdi=true