Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Formal systematic review of data on patients in all relevant trials is required
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITOR
The increased death rate with selegiline in the Parkinson's
Disease Research Group's trial highlights the problem of interpreting
the results of a small trial in isolation. Ben-Shlomo et al emphasised
the internal consistency of this finding,1 which is not
surprising because much of the original data were reanalysed. The
hazard ratio was lower than in the original report (1.32 v 1.57), which suggests that the trial might have
stopped on a random high.
| Table Removed (Available Only in the Full Text) |
There is no formal systematic review of all unconfounded randomised
trials comparing long term selegiline with control treatment in
patients with early Parkinson's disease. One attempt by the manufacturers of selegiline did not say which trials were
included.2 I found three such trials in the Cochrane
controlled trials register, with follow up ranging from 2.5 to 8.2 years
that is, after the increase in deaths with selegiline started in
the Parkinson's Disease Research Group's trial.3-5 Two
trials