ArticleDrugs - real world outcomes2023
An Attempt to Replicate Randomized Trials of Diabetes Treatments Using a Japanese Administrative Claims and Health Checkup Database: A Feasibility Study.
Article in Drugs - real world outcomes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility of Reconstructing Survival Outcomes from Unstructured Electronic Medical Records under Japan's Next-Generation Medical Infrastructure Act: A Historical Cohort Study of Atezolizumab in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2026Article
- Mapping eligibility criteria in oncology target trial emulations using real-world data: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUse of real-world evidence (RWE) has been limited for evaluating effectiveness because of the lack of confidence in its reliability. Examining whether a rigorously designed observational study using real-world data (RWD) can reproduce the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) will provide insights into the implementation of high-quality RWE studies that can produce valid conclusions.
objectiveWe aimed to replicate published RCTs using a Japanese claims and health checkup database and examine whether the emulated RWE studies' results agree with those of the original RCTs.
methodsWe selected three RCTs on diabetes medications for replication in patients with type 2 diabetes. The study outcome was either the change or percentage change in HbA1c levels from baseline. We designed three observational studies using the RWD to mimic the critical study elements of the respective RCTs as closely as possible. We performed 1:1 propensity score nearest-neighbor matching to balance the groups for potential confounders. The differences in outcomes between the groups and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in each RWE study, and the results were compared with those of the RCT.
resultsPatient characteristics, such as age, sex, and duration of diabetes, differed between the RWE studies and RCTs. In Trial 1 emulation, the percentage changes in HbA1c levels were larger in the treatment group than in the comparator group (difference -6.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) -11.01 to -1.40). In Trial 2, the change in HbA1c level was larger in the treatment group (difference -0.01; 95% CI -0.25 to 0.23), and in Trial 3, it was smaller in the treatment group (difference 0.46; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.94). These results did not show regulatory or estimate agreement with the RCTs.
conclusionsNone of the three emulated RWE studies using this claims and health checkup database reproduced the same conclusions as the RCTs. These discrepancies could largely be attributed to design differences between RWE studies and RCTs, primarily due to the lack of necessary data in the database. This particular RWD source may not be the best fit for evaluating treatment effects using laboratory data as the study outcome.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.