IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0084104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Randomised Controlled Trials May Underestimate Drug Effects: Balanced Placebo Trial Design

Author

Listed:
  • Karen Lund
  • Lene Vase
  • Gitte L Petersen
  • Troels S Jensen
  • Nanna B Finnerup

Abstract

Background: It is an inherent assumption in randomised controlled trials that the drug effect can be estimated by subtracting the response during placebo from the response during active drug treatment. Objective: To test the assumption of additivity. The primary hypothesis was that the total treatment effect is smaller than the sum of the drug effect and the placebo effect. The secondary hypothesis was that non-additivity was most pronounced in participants with large placebo effects. Methods: We used a within-subject randomised blinded balanced placebo design and included 48 healthy volunteers (50% males), mean (SD) age 23.4 (6.2) years. Experimental pain was induced by injections of hypertonic saline into the masseter muscle. Participants received four injections with hypertonic saline along with lidocaine or matching placebo in randomised order: A: received hypertonic saline/told hypertonic saline; B: received hypertonic saline+lidocaine/told hypertonic saline; C: received hypertonic saline+placebo/told hypertonic saline+pain killer; D: received hypertonic saline+lidocaine/told hypertonic saline+pain killer. The primary outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC, mm2) of pain intensity during injections. Results: There was a significant difference between the sum of the drug effect and the placebo effect (mean AUC 6279 mm2 (95% CI, 4936–7622)) and the total treatment effect (mean AUC 5455 mm2 (95% CI, 4585–6324)) (P = 0.049). This difference was larger for participants with large versus small placebo effects (P = 0.015), and the difference correlated significantly with the size of the placebo effect (r = 0.65, P = 0.006). Conclusion: Although this study examined placebo effects and not the whole placebo response as in randomised controlled trials, it does suggest that the additivity assumption may be incorrect, and that the estimated drug effects in randomised controlled trials may be underestimated, particularly in studies reporting large placebo responses. The implications for randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews need to be discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen Lund & Lene Vase & Gitte L Petersen & Troels S Jensen & Nanna B Finnerup, 2014. "Randomised Controlled Trials May Underestimate Drug Effects: Balanced Placebo Trial Design," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0084104
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0084104
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0084104&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0084104?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Theresa Tondorf & Lisa-Katrin Kaufmann & Alexander Degel & Cosima Locher & Johanna Birkhäuer & Heike Gerger & Ulrike Ehlert & Jens Gaab, 2017. "Employing open/hidden administration in psychotherapy research: A randomized-controlled trial of expressive writing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Christine Valente & Hans H. Sievertsen & Mahesh C. Puri, 2020. "Saving Neonatal Lives for a Quarter," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 20/728, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0084104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.