There is grossly inadequate detail to understand what they actually did!
The number in the trial is far too small.
The use of a 17:1 ratio is very likely inadequate - and the rationale for using that ratio is questionable.
It looks as if 65% responded (I assume that means had improvement of symptoms?) and yet the whole abstract is so deeply and drearily negative, it actually feels as if it was reporting 65% got worse!
Obviously, this paper will become a classic one for similarly negative medics to refer to.
Possibly, there is just an outside chance that when the full paper becomes feely available in October, it could make a bit more sense?
Eur Thyroid J. 2017 Apr;6(2):89-93. doi: 10.1159/000454878. Epub 2017 Jan 19.
Neither Baseline nor Changes in Serum Triiodothyronine during Levothyroxine/Liothyronine Combination Therapy Predict a Positive Response to This Treatment Modality in Hypothyroid Patients with Persistent Symptoms.
Medici BB1, la Cour JL1, Michaelsson LF1, Faber JO1, Nygaard B1.
1 Department of Endocrinology, Herlev University Hospital, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Despite biochemical euthyroidism, some levothyroxine (L-T4)-treated hypothyroid patients report persisting symptoms and some of these patients are tentatively treated with a combination of L-T4 and liothyronine (L-T3). Combination therapy and the appropriate choice of blood tests to monitor treatment are highly debated among specialists and patients.
To evaluate whether measuring serum triiodothyronine (S-T3) at baseline or during combination therapy can be used as an indicator of a positive effect from L-T4/L-T3 combination therapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
Observational retrospective study of patients (n = 42) with persisting symptoms of hypothyroidism despite L-T4 therapy who had normal TSH levels and did not have any comorbidities that could explain their symptoms. All were then treated with L-T4/L-T3 combination therapy at a dose ratio of 17/1 according to European Thyroid Association guidelines. Based on patient-reported outcome, they were divided into responders and nonresponders.
Five patients were lost to follow-up and thus excluded. At the 3-month follow-up, 11 were classified as nonresponders and 26 as responders. At 12 months these figures had changed to 13 (35%) and 24 (65%), respectively. When comparing responders versus nonresponders, no differences were seen at baseline or during follow-up in S-T3 and in free T3 estimates. Further, logistic regression showed no correlation between S-T3 and free T3 estimates and responder/nonresponder status.
Our data indicate that serum T3 measurements are not suitable to predict which patient will benefit from L-T4/L-T3 combination therapy, and treatment response cannot be followed by repeated T3 measurements either.
Levothyroxine; Liothyronine; Serum triiodothyronine
PMCID: PMC5422753 [Available on 2017-10-01]