Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Emerging Themes in Epidemiology 1/2009

Open Access 01-12-2009 | Hypothesis

Revisiting the relationship between baseline risk and risk under treatment

Authors: Hao Wang, Jean-Pierre Boissel, Patrice Nony

Published in: Emerging Themes in Epidemiology | Issue 1/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In medical practice, it is generally accepted that the 'effect model' describing the relationship between baseline risk and risk under treatment is linear, i.e. 'relative risk' is constant. Absolute benefit is then proportional to a patient's baseline risk and the treatment is most effective among high-risk patients. Alternatively, the 'effect model' becomes curvilinear when 'odds ratio' is considered to be constant. However these two models are based on purely empirical considerations, and there is still no theoretical approach to support either the linear or the non-linear relation.

Presentation of the hypothesis

From logistic and sigmoidal Emax (Hill) models, we derived a phenomenological model which includes the possibility of integrating both beneficial and harmful effects. Instead of a linear relation, our model suggests that the relationship is curvilinear i.e. the moderate-risk patients gain most from the treatment in opposition to those with low or high risk.

Testing the hypothesis

Two approaches can be proposed to investigate in practice such a model. The retrospective one is to perform a meta-analysis of clinical trials with subgroups of patients including a great range of baseline risks. The prospective one is to perform a large clinical trial in which patients are recruited according to several prestratified diverse and high risk groups.

Implications of the hypothesis

For the quantification of the treatment effect and considering such a model, the discrepancy between odds ratio and relative risk may be related not only to the level of risk under control conditions, but also to the characteristics of the dose-effect relation and the amount of dose administered. In the proposed approach, OR may be considered as constant in the whole range of Rc, and depending only on the intrinsic characteristics of the treatment. Therefore, OR should be preferred rather than RR to summarize information on treatment efficacy.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Collet JP, Boissel JP: Sick population-treated population: the need for a better definition. The VALIDATA Group. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1991, 41: 267-71.CrossRefPubMed Collet JP, Boissel JP: Sick population-treated population: the need for a better definition. The VALIDATA Group. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1991, 41: 267-71.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Boissel JP: Individualizing aspirin therapy for prevention of cardiovascular events. JAMA. 1998, 280: 1949-50.CrossRefPubMed Boissel JP: Individualizing aspirin therapy for prevention of cardiovascular events. JAMA. 1998, 280: 1949-50.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Boissel JP, Cucherat M, Gueyffier F: What target for guidelines: uniformed or tailored? Am J Hypertens. 1998, 11: 890-3.CrossRefPubMed Boissel JP, Cucherat M, Gueyffier F: What target for guidelines: uniformed or tailored? Am J Hypertens. 1998, 11: 890-3.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Arends LR, Hoes AW, Lubsen J, Grobbee DE, Stijnen T: Baseline risk as predictor of treatment benefit: three clinical meta-re-analyses. Stat Med. 2000, 19: 3497-518.CrossRefPubMed Arends LR, Hoes AW, Lubsen J, Grobbee DE, Stijnen T: Baseline risk as predictor of treatment benefit: three clinical meta-re-analyses. Stat Med. 2000, 19: 3497-518.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Boissel JP, Collet JP, Lièvre M, Girard P: An effect model for the assessment of drug benefit: example of antiarrhythmic drugs in post-myocardial infarction patients. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1993, 22: 356-363.CrossRefPubMed Boissel JP, Collet JP, Lièvre M, Girard P: An effect model for the assessment of drug benefit: example of antiarrhythmic drugs in post-myocardial infarction patients. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1993, 22: 356-363.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference L'Abbe KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K: Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med. 1987, 107: 224-33.CrossRefPubMed L'Abbe KA, Detsky AS, O'Rourke K: Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med. 1987, 107: 224-33.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Boissel JP, Cucherat M, Nony P, Chabaud S, Gueyffier F, Wright JM, Lièvre M, Leizorovicz A: New insights on the relation between untreated and treated outcomes for a given therapy : effect model is not necessarily linear. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008, 61: 301-7.CrossRefPubMed Boissel JP, Cucherat M, Nony P, Chabaud S, Gueyffier F, Wright JM, Lièvre M, Leizorovicz A: New insights on the relation between untreated and treated outcomes for a given therapy : effect model is not necessarily linear. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008, 61: 301-7.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Bagley SC, White H, Golomb BA: Logistic regression in the medical literature: standards for use and reporting, with particular attention to one medical domain. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001, 54: 979-85.CrossRefPubMed Bagley SC, White H, Golomb BA: Logistic regression in the medical literature: standards for use and reporting, with particular attention to one medical domain. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001, 54: 979-85.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Gabrielsson J, Weiner D: Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Data Analysis. Concepts and Applications. 2000, chapter 4: 177-189. Swedish Pharmaceutical Press, 3. Gabrielsson J, Weiner D: Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Data Analysis. Concepts and Applications. 2000, chapter 4: 177-189. Swedish Pharmaceutical Press, 3.
10.
go back to reference Stewart LA: Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Statist Med. 1995, 14: 2057-79. 10.1002/sim.4780141902.CrossRef Stewart LA: Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Statist Med. 1995, 14: 2057-79. 10.1002/sim.4780141902.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Ioannidis JPA, Lau J: The impact of high-risk patients on the results of clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997, 50: 1089-98.CrossRefPubMed Ioannidis JPA, Lau J: The impact of high-risk patients on the results of clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997, 50: 1089-98.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Deeks JJ: Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. Statist Med. 2002, 21: 1575-1600. 10.1002/sim.1188.CrossRef Deeks JJ: Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. Statist Med. 2002, 21: 1575-1600. 10.1002/sim.1188.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Revisiting the relationship between baseline risk and risk under treatment
Authors
Hao Wang
Jean-Pierre Boissel
Patrice Nony
Publication date
01-12-2009
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Emerging Themes in Epidemiology / Issue 1/2009
Electronic ISSN: 1742-7622
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-7622-6-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2009

Emerging Themes in Epidemiology 1/2009 Go to the issue