Stopping a Trial for Futility: The Cooperative New Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study II

  • Steven Snapinn
  • Curt D. Furberg


The Cooperative New Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study II (CONSENSUS II) trial was designed to test the hypothesis that enalapril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, would reduce the risk of death in patients with an acute myocardial infarction. A sequential stopping rule that allowed for both early acceptance and early rejection of the null hypothesis, in the spirit of stochastic curtailment, was developed specifically for this trial. Very early in the trial the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee noticed an excess of mortality in the enalapril group. When this trend persisted, the committee first recommended protocol modifications, then termination of recruitment, and finally termination of the trial. The main reason was futility, as well as the possibility of harm, particularly in certain subgroups. This trial provides useful lessons regarding futility analyses, flexible monitoring rules, and the sponsor’s role on both the Data Monitoring Committee and the Steering Committee.


Acute Myocardial Infarction Steering Committee Case Study Approach Monitoring Committee Data Monitoring Committee 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    The CONSENSUS Trial Study Group. 1987. Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure: Results of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS). N Engl J Med 316:1429–1435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The SOLVD Investigators. 1991. Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 325:293–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yusuf S, Pepine CJ, Garces C, Pouleur H, Salem D, Kostis J, et al. 1992. Effects of enalapril on myocardial infarction and unstable angina in patients with low ejection fractions. Lancet 340:1173–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kjekshus J, Swedberg K, Snapinn SM: CONSENSUS-II. 1999. In Nash IS, Fuster V (eds.): Efficacy of Myocardial Infarction Therapy: An Evaluation of Clinical Trial Evidence. Marcel Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Snapinn, SM: Plans for the Enalapril Post-MI Trial (CONSENSUS II). 1992. In Peace KE (ed.): Biopharmaceutical Sequential Statistical Applications. Marcel Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Swedberg K, Held P, Kjekshus J, Rasmussen K, Ryden L, Wedel H. 1992. Effects of the early administration of enalapril on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Results of the Co-operative New Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS-II), N Engl J Med 11:659–672.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lan KKG, Simon R, Halperin M. 1982. Stochastically curtailed tests in long-term clinical trials. Commun Stat C 1:207–219.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Snapinn SM. 1992. Monitoring clinical trials with a conditional probability sequential stopping rule. Stat Med 11:659–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio Della Sopravivenza nell’Infarto Miocardio (GISSI-3). 1994. Effects of lisinopril and transdermal glyceryl trinitrate singly and together on 6-week mortality and ventricular function after acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 343:1115–1122.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ISIS-4 Collaborative Group. 1995. A randomized factorial trial assessing early oral captopril, oral mononitrate, and intravenous magnesium sulphate in 58,050 patients suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 345:686–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Snapinn S, Cook T, Shapiro D, Snavely D. 2004. The role of the unblinded sponsor statistician. Stat Med 23:1531–1533.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Snapinn
    • 1
  • Curt D. Furberg
    • 2
  1. 1.Amgen Inc.Thousand Oaks
  2. 2.Department of Public Health SciencesWake Forest University School of MedicineWinston-SalemUSA

Personalised recommendations