Clinical Trials Increase Off-Study Drug Use: A Segmented Time-Series Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The effect of participation in a clinical trial on concomitant off-study investigational drug use has not been described. We sought to determine if participation in the Daptomycin as Adjunctive Therapy for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (DASH) trial increased overall daptomycin prescribing at study sites. Methods We retrospectively analyzed daptomycin use for 8 years preceding the trial, off-study daptomycin use during the trial itself (31 months), and daptomycin use for 6 fiscal months after trial completion. We used a segmented linear regression analysis of an interrupted time series to analyze changes in each drug’s defined daily doses (DDD) per 1000 patient-days. As a control, we analyzed use of linezolid over these periods and also accounted for rates of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) infections. Results For 1.5 years before the DASH trial, daptomycin use was decreasing by –0.30 DDD per 1000 patient-days per fiscal period (95% CI, –0.52 to –0.07). Following the initiation of the study, there was a statistically significant increase in daptomycin use of 0.28 DDD per 1000 patient-days per fiscal period (95% CI, 0.03 to 0.52), despite low, stable rates of MRSA and VRE infections. Following trial completion, daptomycin use decreased back toward prestudy rates. Use of linezolid remained stable throughout. Conclusions Despite the DASH trial being a negative study, it impacted the prescribing habits of local clinicians during recruitment. Trialists should be aware of potential off-target study effects, and prescribers should be wary of early uptake of interventions before definitive study results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".