Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34275058›Full record

ReviewDigestive diseases and sciences2022

Heterogeneity of Randomized Controlled Trials of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection.

Paul Feuerstadt, Olga C Aroniadis, Felicia L Svedlund, Mariana Garcia, Laura Stong, Mena Boules, Sahil Khanna

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. ADS024, aFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  12. Clinical burden of recurrentAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Paul FeuerstadtPACT-Gastroenterology Center, Hamden, CT, USA. pfeuerstadt@gastrocenter.org.ORCID 0000-0002-7643-9576
Olga C AroniadisDivision of Gastroenterology, Renaissance School of Medicine At Stony, Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA.
Felicia L SvedlundExponent, Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
Mariana GarciaExponent, Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA.
Laura StongFerring Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Parsippany, NJ, USA.
Mena BoulesFerring Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Parsippany, NJ, USA.
Sahil KhannaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Exponent (United States) · USFerring Pharmaceuticals (United States) · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USStony Brook School · USYale University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionClinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of FMT for reduction in CDI recurrences (rCDI), but this treatment and its reporting in the literature has significant heterogeneity. Recent publications (e.g., Ramai et al. in Dig Dis Sci 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-020-06185-7 ) present the clinical outcomes for different FMT methodologies. However, to understand, compare, and contextualize outcomes, this heterogeneity in methods and reporting must be understood.

methodsWe performed a literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of FMT for rCDI to evaluate heterogeneity among trials. A methodical search between January 2010 and May 2019 of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane was conducted for studies investigating FMT in adults with rCDI. RCTs were evaluated for a variety of methodological and reporting criteria.

resultsEight RCTs were identified, wherein 14 different FMT preparations were considered (each with distinct protocols for processing, storage, administration, and dosing). Sample sizes were generally small, with only two studies performing FMT in more than 100 patients. Three studies used non-FMT controls (vancomycin), while the remaining compared FMT with differing routes of administration or formulations. Across the identified studies, there was no standardized manner for reporting the timing of the FMT procedure. All studies tracked adverse events; however, follow-up periods were limited.

conclusionsConsiderable variability exists among RCTs, with marked differences in study design, control groups, and outcome assessment. Lack of a standard-of-care control in many trials may impact reproducibility of FMT trial outcomes in patients with rCDI. Widespread use of FMT for rCDI is still investigational; therefore, these foundational studies provide opportunities to optimize future trials.

Indexed as

Clostridioides difficileClostridium InfectionsAdultFecal Microbiota TransplantationHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeFecal microbiota transplantationHeterogeneityRandomized controlled trialsRecurrent Clostridioides difficile infection

Identifiers

PMID34275058
PMCPMC9236970
OpenAlexW3184742238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.