Richard M. Martin

Bio: Richard M. Martin is an academic researcher from University of Bristol. The author has contributed to research in topics: Prostate cancer & Cancer. The author has an hindex of 75, co-authored 545 publications receiving 27001 citations. Previous affiliations of Richard M. Martin include Medical Research Council & Queen's University Belfast.

The MR-Base platform supports systematic causal inference across the human phenome

Abstract: Results from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) can be used to infer causal relationships between phenotypes, using a strategy known as 2-sample Mendelian randomization (2SMR) and bypassing the need for individual-level data. However, 2SMR methods are evolving rapidly and GWAS results are often insufficiently curated, undermining efficient implementation of the approach. We therefore developed MR-Base ( http://www.mrbase.org ): a platform that integrates a curated database of complete GWAS results (no restrictions according to statistical significance) with an application programming interface, web app and R packages that automate 2SMR. The software includes several sensitivity analyses for assessing the impact of horizontal pleiotropy and other violations of assumptions. The database currently comprises 11 billion single nucleotide polymorphism-trait associations from 1673 GWAS and is updated on a regular basis. Integrating data with software ensures more rigorous application of hypothesis-driven analyses and allows millions of potential causal relationships to be efficiently evaluated in phenome-wide association studies.

Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the association of inadequate or unclear allocation concealment and lack of blinding with biased estimates of intervention effects varies with the nature of the intervention or outcome. DESIGN: Combined analysis of data from three meta-epidemiological studies based on collections of meta-analyses. DATA SOURCES: 146 meta-analyses including 1346 trials examining a wide range of interventions and outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ratios of odds ratios quantifying the degree of bias associated with inadequate or unclear allocation concealment, and lack of blinding, for trials with different types of intervention and outcome. A ratio of odds ratios <1 implies that inadequately concealed or non-blinded trials exaggerate intervention effect estimates. RESULTS: In trials with subjective outcomes effect estimates were exaggerated when there was inadequate or unclear allocation concealment (ratio of odds ratios 0.69 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.82)) or lack of blinding (0.75 (0.61 to 0.93)). In contrast, there was little evidence of bias in trials with objective outcomes: ratios of odds ratios 0.91 (0.80 to 1.03) for inadequate or unclear allocation concealment and 1.01 (0.92 to 1.10) for lack of blinding. There was little evidence for a difference between trials of drug and non-drug interventions. Except for trials with all cause mortality as the outcome, the magnitude of bias varied between meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The average bias associated with defects in the conduct of randomised trials varies with the type of outcome. Systematic reviewers should routinely assess the risk of bias in the results of trials, and should report meta-analyses restricted to trials at low risk of bias either as the primary analysis or in conjunction with less restrictive analyses.

10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer

Abstract: BACKGROUND The comparative effectiveness of treatments for prostate cancer that is detected by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing remains uncertain. METHODS We compared active monitoring, radical prostatectomy, and external-beam radiotherapy for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. Between 1999 and 2009, a total of 82,429 men 50 to 69 years of age received a PSA test; 2664 received a diagnosis of localized prostate cancer, and 1643 agreed to undergo randomization to active monitoring (545 men), surgery (553), or radiotherapy (545). The primary outcome was prostate-cancer mortality at a median of 10 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the rates of disease progression, metastases, and all-cause deaths. RESULTS There were 17 prostate-cancer–specific deaths overall: 8 in the active-monitoring group (1.5 deaths per 1000 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7 to 3.0), 5 in the surgery group (0.9 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 0.4 to 2.2), and 4 in the radiotherapy group (0.7 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 0.3 to 2.0); the difference among the groups was not significant (P=0.48 for the overall comparison). In addition, no significant difference was seen among the groups in the number of deaths from any cause (169 deaths overall; P=0.87 for the comparison among the three groups). Metastases developed in more men in the active-monitoring group (33 men; 6.3 events per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 4.5 to 8.8) than in the surgery group (13 men; 2.4 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.2) or the radiotherapy group (16 men; 3.0 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 1.9 to 4.9) (P=0.004 for the overall comparison). Higher rates of disease progression were seen in the active-monitoring group (112 men; 22.9 events per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 19.0 to 27.5) than in the surgery group (46 men; 8.9 events per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 6.7 to 11.9) or the radiotherapy group (46 men; 9.0 events per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 6.7 to 12.0) (P<0.001 for the overall comparison). CONCLUSIONS At a median of 10 years, prostate-cancer–specific mortality was low irrespective of the treatment assigned, with no significant difference among treatments. Surgery and radiotherapy were associated with lower incidences of disease progression and metastases than was active monitoring.

Effect of Infant Feeding on the Risk of Obesity Across the Life Course: A Quantitative Review of Published Evidence

Abstract: Objective. To examine the influence of initial infant feeding on obesity in later life. Methods. A systematic review of published studies investigating the association between infant feeding and a measure of obesity was performed with Medline (1966 onward) and Embase (1980 onward) databases, supplemented with manual searches. Data extraction was conducted by 2 authors. Analyses were based on odds ratios of obesity among initially breastfed subjects, compared with formula-fed subjects, pooled with fixed-effects models. Results. Sixty-one studies reported on the relationship of infant feeding to a measure of obesity in later life; of these, 28 (298900 subjects) provided odds ratio estimates. In these studies, breastfeeding was associated with a reduced risk of obesity, compared with formula feeding (odds ratio: 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85–0.89). The inverse association between breastfeeding and obesity was particularly strong in 11 small studies of Conclusions. Initial breastfeeding protects against obesity in later life. However, a further review including large unpublished studies exploring the effect of confounding factors in more detail is needed.

The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

Abstract: Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

Abstract: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation.

Abstract: Protocols of systematic reviews and meta-analyses allow for planning and documentation of review methods, act as a guard against arbitrary decision making during review conduct, enable readers to assess for the presence of selective reporting against completed reviews, and, when made publicly available, reduce duplication of efforts and potentially prompt collaboration. Evidence documenting the existence of selective reporting and excessive duplication of reviews on the same or similar topics is accumulating and many calls have been made in support of the documentation and public availability of review protocols. Several efforts have emerged in recent years to rectify these problems, including development of an international register for prospective reviews (PROSPERO) and launch of the first open access journal dedicated to the exclusive publication of systematic review products, including protocols (BioMed Central's Systematic Reviews). Furthering these efforts and building on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, an international group of experts has created a guideline to improve the transparency, accuracy, completeness, and frequency of documented systematic review and meta-analysis protocols--PRISMA-P (for protocols) 2015. The PRISMA-P checklist contains 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol.This PRISMA-P 2015 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides readers with a full understanding of and evidence about the necessity of each item as well as a model example from an existing published protocol. This paper should be read together with the PRISMA-P 2015 statement. Systematic review authors and assessors are strongly encouraged to make use of PRISMA-P when drafting and appraising review protocols.

European Guidelines on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (Version 2012)

Abstract: ABI : ankle–brachial index ACCORD : Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes ADVANCE : Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation AGREE : Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation AHA : American Heart Association apoA1 : apolipoprotein A1 apoB : apolipoprotein B CABG : coronary artery bypass graft surgery CARDS : Collaborative AtoRvastatin Diabetes Study CCNAP : Council on Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions CHARISMA : Clopidogrel for High Athero-thrombotic Risk and Ischemic Stabilisation, Management, and Avoidance CHD : coronary heart disease CKD : chronic kidney disease COMMIT : Clopidogrel and Metoprolol in Myocardial Infarction Trial CRP : C-reactive protein CURE : Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events CVD : cardiovascular disease DALYs : disability-adjusted life years DBP : diastolic blood pressure DCCT : Diabetes Control and Complications Trial ED : erectile dysfunction eGFR : estimated glomerular filtration rate EHN : European Heart Network EPIC : European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition EUROASPIRE : European Action on Secondary and Primary Prevention through Intervention to Reduce Events GFR : glomerular filtration rate GOSPEL : Global Secondary Prevention Strategies to Limit Event Recurrence After MI GRADE : Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation HbA1c : glycated haemoglobin HDL : high-density lipoprotein HF-ACTION : Heart Failure and A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise TraiNing HOT : Hypertension Optimal Treatment Study HPS : Heart Protection Study HR : hazard ratio hsCRP : high-sensitivity C-reactive protein HYVET : Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial ICD : International Classification of Diseases IMT : intima-media thickness INVEST : International Verapamil SR/Trandolapril JTF : Joint Task Force LDL : low-density lipoprotein Lp(a) : lipoprotein(a) LpPLA2 : lipoprotein-associated phospholipase 2 LVH : left ventricular hypertrophy MATCH : Management of Atherothrombosis with Clopidogrel in High-risk Patients with Recent Transient Ischaemic Attack or Ischaemic Stroke MDRD : Modification of Diet in Renal Disease MET : metabolic equivalent MONICA : Multinational MONItoring of trends and determinants in CArdiovascular disease NICE : National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence NRT : nicotine replacement therapy NSTEMI : non-ST elevation myocardial infarction ONTARGET : Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial OSA : obstructive sleep apnoea PAD : peripheral artery disease PCI : percutaneous coronary intervention PROactive : Prospective Pioglitazone Clinical Trial in Macrovascular Events PWV : pulse wave velocity QOF : Quality and Outcomes Framework RCT : randomized clinical trial RR : relative risk SBP : systolic blood pressure SCORE : Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation Project SEARCH : Study of the Effectiveness of Additional Reductions in Cholesterol and SHEP : Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program STEMI : ST-elevation myocardial infarction SU.FOL.OM3 : SUpplementation with FOlate, vitamin B6 and B12 and/or OMega-3 fatty acids Syst-Eur : Systolic Hypertension in Europe TNT : Treating to New Targets UKPDS : United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study VADT : Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial VALUE : Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use VITATOPS : VITAmins TO Prevent Stroke VLDL : very low-density lipoprotein WHO : World Health Organization ### 1.1 Introduction Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a chronic disorder developing insidiously throughout life and usually progressing to an advanced stage by the time symptoms occur. It remains the major cause of premature death in Europe, even though CVD mortality has …