Dataset Information

Continuous versus group sequential analysis for post-market drug and vaccine safety surveillance.

ABSTRACT: The use of sequential statistical analysis for post-market drug safety surveillance is quickly emerging. Both continuous and group sequential analysis have been used, but consensus is lacking as to when to use which approach. We compare the statistical performance of continuous and group sequential analysis in terms of type I error probability; statistical power; expected time to signal when the null hypothesis is rejected; and the sample size required to end surveillance without rejecting the null. We present a mathematical proposition to show that for any group sequential design there always exists a continuous sequential design that is uniformly better. As a consequence, it is shown that more frequent testing is always better. Additionally, for a Poisson based probability model and a flat rejection boundary in terms of the log likelihood ratio, we compare the performance of various continuous and group sequential designs. Using exact calculations, we found that, for the parameter settings used, there is always a continuous design with shorter expected time to signal than the best group design. The two key conclusions from this article are (i) that any post-market safety surveillance system should attempt to obtain data as frequently as possible, and (ii) that sequential testing should always be performed when new data arrives without deliberately waiting for additional data.

SUBMITTER: Silva IR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4888780 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Continuous versus group sequential analysis for post-market drug and vaccine safety surveillance.

Silva I R IR Kulldorff M M

Biometrics 20150522 3

The use of sequential statistical analysis for post-market drug safety surveillance is quickly emerging. Both continuous and group sequential analysis have been used, but consensus is lacking as to when to use which approach. We compare the statistical performance of continuous and group sequential analysis in terms of type I error probability; statistical power; expected time to signal when the null hypothesis is rejected; and the sample size required to end surveillance without rejecting the n ...[more]

PMID: 26011024

Similar Datasets

Project description:Highlights • Active post-marketing safety surveillance on ROTASIIL, an oral rotavirus vaccine, was conducted in 9940 infants in India.• Three doses of ROTASIIL were administered at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age, along with other EPI vaccines.• Most of the AEs were pyrexia and injection site reactions caused by the concomitant injectable vaccines.• No case of intussusception (IS) was reported.• ROTASIIL was safe and well tolerated. Background ROTASIIL, an oral live attenuated bovine-human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine, was approved in 2017. This post-marketing surveillance (PMS) was conducted to collect real-world data on the safety of ROTASIIL in India. Methods Observational, active PMS was conducted in approximately 10,000 infants aged ≥ 6 weeks. ROTASIIL was administered as a 3-dose regimen, at least 4 weeks apart, beginning at ≥ 6 weeks of age concomitantly with other Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) vaccines. Participants were followed for one month after the last dose. The adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), including intussusception (IS) reported during the follow up period were collected. Findings A total of 9940 infants were enrolled and were considered for safety analysis. Around 9913 (99.7 %) infants received 2 doses, while 9893 (99.5 %) infants completed all three doses. Total 3693 AEs were reported in 2516 (25.3 %) participants. Most of these AEs were pyrexia (78.01 % of events) and injection-site reactions (19.14 % of events). Nearly all AEs were causally unrelated to orally administered ROTASIIL and could be caused by the concomitant injectable vaccines. Only 4 AEs (2 events of vomiting and 1 event each of discomfort and pyrexia) in 4 (<0.1 %) participants could be related to ROTASIIL. AEs were of mild or moderate severity and all resolved without any sequelae. A total of 2 SAEs (acute otitis media and skull fracture) were reported in 2 (<0.1 %) participants and were not related to ROTASIIL and recovered without sequelae. No case of IS was reported. Interpretation ROTASIIL was safe and well tolerated in this study. No safety concerns were reported. Funding The study was funded by SIIPL which is the manufacturer of the study product.

Dataset Information

Continuous versus group sequential analysis for post-market drug and vaccine safety surveillance.

Publications

Continuous versus group sequential analysis for post-market drug and vaccine safety surveillance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets