those who received sham OMT. In subgroup analyses of patients with high baseline pain severity (≥50 mm on a 100-mm visual

analogue scale [VAS]), there was a large treatment effect with OMT in attaining substantial LBP improvement in concert with clinically relevant improvement in back-specific functioning (Licciardone et al., 2013a). Low back pain was measured immediately prior to each treatment session and at the week 12 exit visit with a 100-mm VAS. The VAS pain score for any missed treatment Nivolumab session or exit visit was imputed using the last-observation-carried-forward method. The threshold of ≥50% pain reduction relative to baseline was used to indicate substantial LBP improvement based upon recommendations from the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) (Dworkin et al., 2008). This threshold, which is most commonly used to define responders in randomized controlled trials involving patients with chronic LBP (Henschke et al., 2014), Torin 1 solubility dmso was used to assess clinical response at weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12. Consequently, an initial clinical response to treatment may have been recorded at any of these time points. Stable clinical response was defined as the attainment of an initial clinical response without subsequently dropping below the 50% pain reduction

threshold for substantial LBP improvement. Never-response was defined as never attaining an initial clinical response during the 12-week trial period. Relapse occurred if a patient dropped below the 50% pain reduction threshold for substantial LBP improvement at the week 12 exit visit after having previously attained an initial clinical response to treatment. Patients whose initial clinical response occurred at the week 12 exit visit were considered stable Inositol monophosphatase 1 responders and were not at risk of relapse. Clinical response status at the week 12 exit visit was used to measure the overall short-term efficacy of OMT, regardless of whether or not an initial clinical response previously occurred. Differences between treatment groups in baseline patient characteristics and flow through the trial were analyzed using non-parametric statistical methods

for continuous variables and the χ2 test for 2 × 2 contingency tables. Clinical response and relapse profiles were plotted over time for each patient. The proportion of time over 12 weeks that each patient experienced substantial LBP improvement was measured and weighted means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for each treatment group. Clinical response status at weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 was used to predict clinical response at the week 12 exit visit by adapting statistical measures and 95% CIs for diagnostic tests, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, and likelihood ratios for presence or absence of a clinical response (Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, 2014).