The HRT controversy: observational studies and RCTs fall in line

  title={The HRT controversy: observational studies and RCTs fall in line},
  author={J. Vandenbroucke},
  journal={The Lancet},

Topics from this paper

Summarising the Evidence for Drug Safety: A Methodological Discussion of Different Meta-Analysis Approaches
The different data sources for summarising drug safety outcomes, according to study design, publication of data, and origin of the information are reviewed, focusing on meta-analyses of aggregate data and meta-Analyses of individual patient data. Expand
Hormone replacement therapy in women with cancer and risk of cancer-specific mortality and cardiovascular disease: a protocol for a cohort study from Scotland and Wales
This study will provide evidence to inform guidance given to women diagnosed with cancer on the safety of HRT use and/or guide modifications to clinical practice and investigate whether HRT alters the risk of second cancers, cardiovascular disease, venous thromboembolism and all-cause mortality. Expand
Low intraoperative end-tidal carbon dioxide: a promising target to improve outcomes or a marker of physiologic instability?
In their thought-provoking study in this issue of the Journal, Dong et al. have shown an interesting association between low intraoperative end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) and postoperativeExpand
Assessing the impact of unmeasured confounders for credible and reliable real‐world evidence
We review statistical methods for assessing the possible impact of bias due to unmeasured confounding in real world data analysis and provide detailed recommendations for choosing among the methods.
Causal inference methods for combining randomized trials and observational studies: a review
This paper first discusses identification and estimation methods that improve generalizability of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the representativeness of observational data, and methods that combining RCTs and observational data to improve the (conditional) average treatment effect estimation. Expand
Guidelines seek unbiased recommendations
The guideline panel agreed that before widespread clinical adoption, alternative transfusion triggers should be rigorously evaluated in RCTs and identified ScvO2, arteriovenous oxygen difference, cerebral tissue oxygenation, plasma lactate, and veno-arterial CO2 gradient as potential alternative triggers, but insufficient evidence exists to justify the use of any of these “alternative” transfusions triggers. Expand
Level of evidence: randomised or observational studies?
Randomised controlled trials (RCT’s) are regarded as the gold standard in medical research to prove whether presumed effects of medicinal or other treatments are of a causal nature, but one always needs to be aware of methodological limitations such as ‘confounding by indication’, the ’healthy cohort effect’ and the ‘immortal time bias’. Expand
Menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer
A comprehensive meta-analysis of individual patient data of over 100,000 women with breast cancer from 24 prospective observational studies found an association between invasive breast cancer and hormone therapy which was likely to be causative, and the risk proved highest for oestrogen/progestogen combination therapies. Expand
Real world effects of COPD medications: a cohort study with validation against results from randomised controlled trials
In COPD patients selected from real-world data based on similarity to participants of theTORCH RCT, non-interventional methods generated comparable results to the TORCH analysis of LABA-ICS versus LABA in relation to exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia. Expand
Some statistical memes which sound correct but aren't quite: Application to the analysis of observational databases used in learning health systems
  • G. Samsa
  • Computer Science, Medicine
  • Learning health systems
  • 2020
We consider four memes, correct within the context of randomized trials but requiring modification for the analysis of the observational databases typically associated with learning health systems:Expand


Authorsʼ Response, Part I: Observational Studies Analyzed Like Randomized Experiments: Best of Both Worlds
A novel approach that conceptualizes a follow-up observational study as a sequence of "trials" and finds that it combines the limitations of both observational studies and randomized trials, gives biased adherence-adjusted HR estimates, and "adds no new insights on the relation of hormone therapy to CHD". Expand
Authorʼs Response, Part II
The overall Women's Health Initiative results for CHD should not be generalized to the majority of women who start hormone therapy near the time of menopause, and correspondingly the overall results of the NHS and other observational results should not been generalized to women starting hormone use many years afterMenopause. Expand
Benefits and risks of drug treatments: how to combine the best evidence on benefits with the best data about adverse effects.
To understand the full spectrum of adverse effects—those that occur late, that were not known beforehand, and that are rare but nevertheless serious—and to be able to investigate the true incidence of known adverse effects in circumstances of actual prescribing, well-designed observational studies will always be necessary. Expand
Conjugated equine estrogens and breast cancer risk in the Women's Health Initiative clinical trial and observational study.
For women who begin use soon after menopause, combined analyses of clinical trial and observational study data do not provide clear evidence of either an overall reduction or an increase in breast cancer risk with CEEs, although hazard ratios appeared to be relatively higher among women having certain breast cancerrisk factors or a low body mass index. Expand
Data analysis methods and the reliability of analytic epidemiologic research.
Analysis of randomized controlled trial and cohort study results on the effects of postmenopausal estrogen-plus-progestin therapy illustrates the potential of modern data analysis methods to enhance the reliability and interpretation of epidemiologic data. Expand
Estrogen plus progestin therapy and breast cancer in recently postmenopausal women.
Combined trial and observational study data support an adverse effect on breast cancer risk, and women who initiate use soon after menopause, and continue for many years, appear to be at particularly high risk. Expand
ITT for observational data: worst of both worlds?
It is concluded that differences in time since menopause remains the most plausible explanation for the different findings compared with findings from the Women's Health Initiative Trial. Expand
Observational Studies Analyzed Like Randomized Experiments: An Application to Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy and Coronary Heart Disease
The findings suggest that the discrepancies between the Women's Health Initiative and Nurses’ Health Study ITT estimates could be largely explained by differences in the distribution of time since menopause and length of follow-up. Expand
Observational data and clinical trials: narrowing the gap?
An ambitious paper by Hernán et al, in which a new analysis of the Nurses’ Health Study provides results consistent with the randomized trial, is published, followed by 3 commentaries (by Hoover, Stampfer, and Prentice) and responses from the authors. Expand
The sound and the fury: was it all worth it?
The initial report of coronary heart disease (CHD) results from the trial of menopausal hormone therapy within the Women's Health Initiative precipitated substantial surprise and concern in theExpand