Design and testing for clinical trials faced with misclassified causes of death.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Van Rompaye B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2883300 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Design and testing for clinical trials faced with misclassified causes of death.
Van Rompaye Bart B Goetghebeur Els E Jaffar Shabbar S
Biostatistics (Oxford, England) 20100308 3
With clinical trials under pressure to produce more convincing results faster, we reexamine relative efficiencies for the semiparametric comparison of cause-specific rather than all-cause mortality events, observing that in many settings misclassification of cause of failure is not negligible. By incorporating known misclassification rates, we derive an adapted logrank test that optimizes power when the alternative treatment effect is confined to the cause-specific hazard. We derive sample size ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundChemotherapy is expected to reduce cancer deaths (CD), while possibly being harmful in terms of non-cancer deaths (NCD) because of toxicity. Peto's log-rank test is popular in the medical literature, but its operating characteristics are barely known. We compared this test to the most common ones in the statistical literature: the cause-specific hazard test and Gray's test on the hazard of the subdistribution. We investigated for the first time the impact of reclassifications of causes of death (CoD) after recurrences, and of misclassification of CoD.MethodsWe present a simulation study in which we varied the censoring rate and the correlation between CD and NCD times, we generated recurrence times to study the role of the reclassification of CoD, and we added 20% misclassified CoD. We considered four scenarios for the treatment effect: none; none for CD and negative for NCD; positive for CD and none for NCD; positive for CD and negative for NCD. We applied the three tests to a randomized clinical trial evaluating adjuvant chemotherapy in 1,867 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.ResultsMost often the three tests well preserved their nominal size, Gray's test did not when the treatment had an effect on the competing CoD. With a high rate of misclassified CoD, Gray's and the cause-specific tests lost much of their power, whereas the Peto's test had the highest power. The cause-specific test had inflated size for NCD when the treatment was beneficial for CD with many misclassified CoD, but had the highest power for NCD when the treatment had no effect on CD, and had similar power to Peto's test for CD when the treatment had no effect on NCD. Gray's test performed best when the effect on the two CoD was opposite. The higher the censoring, the lower the rejection probabilities of all the tests and the smaller their differences.ConclusionsIn this first head-to-head comparison of the three tests, the cause-specific test often proved to be the most reliable. Comparing results with and without misclassification of the CoD, Peto's test was the least influenced by the presence of such misclassification.
| S-EPMC4047005 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA large multi-center survey was conducted to understand patients' perspectives on biobank study participation with particular focus on racial and ethnic minorities. In order to enrich the study sample with racial and ethnic minorities, disproportionate stratified sampling was implemented with strata defined by electronic health records (EHR) that are known to be inaccurate. We investigate the effect of sampling strata misclassification in complex survey design.MethodsUnder non-differential and differential misclassification in the sampling strata, we compare the validity and precision of three simple and common analysis approaches for settings in which the primary exposure is used to define the sampling strata. We also compare the precision gains/losses observed from using a disproportionate stratified sampling scheme compared to using a simple random sample under varying degrees of strata misclassification.ResultsDisproportionate stratified sampling can result in more efficient parameter estimates of the rare subgroups (race/ethnic minorities) in the sampling strata compared to simple random sampling. When sampling strata misclassification is non-differential with respect to the outcome, a design-agnostic analysis was preferred over model-based and design-based analyses. All methods yielded unbiased parameter estimates but standard error estimates were lowest from the design-agnostic analysis. However, when misclassification is differential, only the design-based method produced valid parameter estimates of the variables included in the sampling strata.ConclusionsIn complex survey design, when the interest is in making inference on rare subgroups, we recommend implementing disproportionate stratified sampling over simple random sampling even if the sampling strata are misclassified. If the misclassification is non-differential, we recommend a design-agnostic analysis. However, if the misclassification is differential, we recommend using design-based analyses.
| S-EPMC8273975 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Drug combination trials are often motivated by the fact that individual drugs target the same disease but via different routes. A combination of such drugs may then have an overall better effect than the individual treatments which has to be verified by clinical trials. Several statistical methods have been explored that discuss the problem of comparing a fixed-dose combination therapy to each of its components. But an extension of these approaches to multiple dose combinations can be difficult and is not yet fully investigated. In this paper, we propose two approaches by which one can provide confirmatory assurance with familywise error rate control, that the combination of two drugs at differing doses is more effective than either component doses alone. These approaches involve multiple comparisons in multilevel factorial designs where the type 1 error can be controlled first, by bootstrapping tests, and second, by considering the least favorable null configurations for a family of union intersection tests. The main advantage of the new approaches is that their implementation is simple. The implementation of these new approaches is illustrated with a real data example from a blood pressure reduction trial. Extensive simulations are also conducted to evaluate the new approaches and benchmark them with existing ones. We also present an illustration of the relationship between the different approaches. We observed that the bootstrap provided some power advantages over the other approaches with the disadvantage that there may be some error rate inflation for small sample sizes.
| S-EPMC7309363 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo study the attributes of quantitative strength testing using hand-held dynamometry (HHD) as an efficacy measure in 2 large phase 3 amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) trials.MethodsIn the phase 3 trials of ceftriaxone and dexpramipexole, 513 and 943 patients, respectively, were enrolled in double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with planned follow-up of at least 1 year. Patients were studied every 3 months in the ceftriaxone study and every 2 months in the dexpramipexole study. Evaluators of HHD were trained and had to show evidence of adequate performance of strength testing; the testing paradigm involved testing 9 muscle groups in the upper and lower extremity bilaterally. Neither drug significantly affected any outcome measure. Strength measurements were evaluated by individual muscle and by megascores, which averaged scaled strength measures to produce an overall measure of muscle strength.ResultsA measure combining rate of decline with both within- and between-patient variabilities of measurement, the coefficient of variation for rate of change, was calculated, and showed that HHD overall performed slightly less well than Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale-revised (ALSFRS-R) but better than vital capacity. Individual muscles were highly correlated to the identical muscles on the contralateral side, as well as to other muscles in the same body region. Strength decline was correlated both with ALSFRS-R and vital capacity.ConclusionQuantitative strength testing using HHD is a reliable and reproducible measure of decline in ALS.
| S-EPMC4977369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Population heterogeneity is frequently observed among patients' treatment responses in clinical trials because of various factors such as clinical background, environmental, and genetic factors. Different subpopulations defined by those baseline factors can lead to differences in the benefit or safety profile of a therapeutic intervention. Ignoring heterogeneity between subpopulations can substantially impact on medical practice. One approach to address heterogeneity necessitates designs and analysis of clinical trials with subpopulation selection. Several types of designs have been proposed for different circumstances. In this work, we discuss a class of designs that allow selection of a predefined subgroup. Using the selection based on the maximum test statistics as the worst-case scenario, we then investigate the precision and accuracy of the maximum likelihood estimator at the end of the study via simulations. We find that the required sample size is chiefly determined by the subgroup prevalence and show in simulations that the maximum likelihood estimator for these designs can be substantially biased.
| S-EPMC6282861 | biostudies-other
Project description:Many trials use stratified randomisation, where participants are randomised within strata defined by one or more baseline covariates. While it is important to adjust for stratification variables in the analysis, the appropriate method of adjustment is unclear when stratification variables are affected by misclassification and hence some participants are randomised in the incorrect stratum. We conducted a simulation study to compare methods of adjusting for stratification variables affected by misclassification in the analysis of continuous outcomes when all or only some stratification errors are discovered, and when the treatment effect or treatment-by-covariate interaction effect is of interest. The data were analysed using linear regression with no adjustment, adjustment for the strata used to perform the randomisation (randomisation strata), adjustment for the strata if all errors are corrected (true strata), and adjustment for the strata after some errors are discovered and corrected (updated strata). The unadjusted model performed poorly in all settings. Adjusting for the true strata was optimal, while the relative performance of adjusting for the randomisation strata or the updated strata varied depending on the setting. As the true strata are unlikely to be known with certainty in practice, we recommend using the updated strata for adjustment and performing subgroup analyses, provided the discovery of errors is unlikely to depend on treatment group, as expected in blinded trials. Greater transparency is needed in the reporting of stratification errors and how they were addressed in the analysis.
| S-EPMC7614797 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Preclinical evidence of successful combinations of ionizing radiation with immunotherapy has inspired testing the translation of these results to the clinic. Interestingly, the preclinical work has consistently predicted the responses encountered in clinical trials. The first example came from a proof-of-principle trial started in 2001 that tested the concept that growth factors acting on antigen-presenting cells improve presentation of tumor antigens released by radiation and induce an abscopal effect. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor was administered during radiotherapy to a metastatic site in patients with metastatic solid tumors to translate evidence obtained in a murine model of syngeneic mammary carcinoma treated with cytokine FLT-3L and radiation. Subsequent clinical availability of vaccines and immune checkpoint inhibitors has triggered a wave of enthusiasm for testing them in combination with radiotherapy. Examples of ongoing clinical trials are described in this report. Importantly, most of these trials include careful immune monitoring of the patients enrolled and will generate important data about the proimmunogenic effects of radiation in combination with a variety of immune modulators, in different disease settings. Results of these studies are building a platform of evidence for radiotherapy as an adjuvant to immunotherapy and encourage the growth of this novel field of radiation oncology.
| S-EPMC4640687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In recent years, the use of adaptive design methods in clinical research and development based on accrued data has become very popular due to its flexibility and efficiency. Based on adaptations applied, adaptive designs can be classified into three categories: prospective, concurrent (ad hoc), and retrospective adaptive designs. An adaptive design allows modifications made to trial and/or statistical procedures of ongoing clinical trials. However, it is a concern that the actual patient population after the adaptations could deviate from the originally target patient population and consequently the overall type I error (to erroneously claim efficacy for an infective drug) rate may not be controlled. In addition, major adaptations of trial and/or statistical procedures of on-going trials may result in a totally different trial that is unable to address the scientific/medical questions the trial intends to answer. In this article, several commonly considered adaptive designs in clinical trials are reviewed. Impacts of ad hoc adaptations (protocol amendments), challenges in by design (prospective) adaptations, and obstacles of retrospective adaptations are described. Strategies for the use of adaptive design in clinical development of rare diseases are discussed. Some examples concerning the development of Velcade intended for multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma are given. Practical issues that are commonly encountered when implementing adaptive design methods in clinical trials are also discussed.
| S-EPMC2422839 | biostudies-literature
Project description:NAFLD is the most common chronic liver disease worldwide, occurring in both obese and lean patients. It can lead to life-threatening liver diseases and nonhepatic complications, such as cirrhosis and cardiovascular diseases, that burden public health and the health care system. Current care is weight loss through diet and exercise, which is a challenging goal to achieve. However, there are no FDA-approved pharmacotherapies for NAFLD. This review thoroughly examines the clinical trial findings from 22 drugs (Phase 2 and above) and evaluates the future direction that trials should take for further drug development. These trialed drugs can broadly be categorized into five groups-hypoglycemic, lipid-lowering, bile-pathway, anti-inflammatory, and others, which include nutraceuticals. The multitude of challenges faced in these yet-to-be-approved NAFLD drug trials provided insight into a few areas of improvement worth considering. These include drug repurposing, combinations, noninvasive outcomes, standardization, adverse event alleviation, and the need for precision medicine with more extensive consideration of NAFLD heterogenicity in drug trials. Understandably, every evolution of the drug development landscape lies with its own set of challenges. However, this paper believes in the importance of always learning from lessons of the past, with each potential improvement pushing clinical trials an additional step forward toward discovering appropriate drugs for effective NAFLD management.
| S-EPMC9820446 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dose-finding methods aiming at identifying an optimal dose of a treatment with a given schedule may be at a risk of misidentifying the best treatment for patients. In this article we propose a phase I/II clinical trial design to find the optimal dose-schedule combination. We define schedule as the method and timing of administration of a given total dose in a treatment cycle. We propose a Bayesian dynamic model for the joint effects of dose and schedule. The proposed model allows us to borrow strength across dose-schedule combinations without making overly restrictive assumptions on the ordering pattern of the schedule effects. We develop a dose-schedule-finding algorithm to sequentially allocate patients to a desirable dose-schedule combination, and select an optimal combination at the end of the trial. We apply the proposed design to a phase I/II clinical trial of a ?-secretase inhibitor in patients with refractory metastatic or locally advanced solid tumours, and examine the operating characteristics of the design through simulations.
| S-EPMC4747255 | biostudies-other