Skip Navigation

European Journal of Heart Failure 2003 5(6):717-723; doi:10.1016/S1388-9842(03)00101-6
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zanolla, L.
Right arrow Articles by Zardini, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zanolla, L.
Right arrow Articles by Zardini, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2003 European Society of Cardiology

Selection of endpoints for heart failure clinical trials

Luisa Zanolla* and Piero Zardini

Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche e Chirurgiche, Sezione di Cardiologia, Università degli Studi di Verona, Ospedale Civile Maggiore Piazzale A. Stefani 1, Verona 37126, Italy

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-45-8072320; fax: +39-45-914727. E-mail address: luisa.zanolla{at}univr.it


  Abstract

In assessing the efficacy and the safety of a new drug, randomized clinical trials represent the standard scientific method. The selection of the best response variables in a clinical trial of a treatment in congestive heart failure patients is often not straightforward; the primary end point of a trial should be clinically relevant, directly related to the primary goal of the trial, and with favorable distributional properties. All-cause mortality is undoubtedly the most unbiased endpoint, but there is interest both in assessing cause-specific mortality and hospitalization rate and in evaluating ‘soft’ endpoints (functional status, exercise tolerance); the latter, in fact, are clinically relevant and potentially more useful in mild heart failure patients. Physiopathologic variables (e.g. left ventricular function) could provide information on drug action mechanism. In this paper, several recent large clinical trials are reviewed and the advantages and drawbacks of the response variables used, are analyzed.

Key Words: Clinical trials • Chronic heart failure • Survival • Outcomes • Mortality • Morbidity

Received November 19, 2001; Revised January 27, 2003; Accepted June 16, 2003


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JCOHome page
R. K.S. Wong, N. Paul, K. Ding, M. Whitehead, M. Brundage, A. Fyles, D. Wilke, A. Nabid, A. Fortin, D. Wilson, et al.
5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 Receptor Antagonist With or Without Short-Course Dexamethasone in the Prophylaxis of Radiation Induced Emesis: A Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (SC19)
J. Clin. Oncol., July 20, 2006; 24(21): 3458 - 3464.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.