ABSTRACTRationale 0.06-0.17). In the control and interventional groups, the absolute risk differences were 0.10 (95%CI 0.01-0.19) and 0.12 (95%CI; 0.06-0.18) respectively. For kidney damage biomarkers, the risk difference was 0.13 (95% CI; 0.06-0.20). The mean pre-planned and achieved statistical powers were 0.84 (±0.07) and 0.43 (±0.28), respectively, with no improvement when extrapolating the pre-planned sample size. Limitations Most RCTs were underpowered for their primary outcome. There was a high level of heterogeneity. Conclusions There is a difference between expected and observed incidence rates that may be partly attributed to biomarker-based enrichment methods. These findings highlight the need for rigorous validation of biomarkers before their incorporation into the eligibility criteria of RCTs.
Chennou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: