Dataset Information

Statistical analysis plan for the POLAR-RCT: The Prophylactic hypOthermia trial to Lessen trAumatic bRain injury-Randomised Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The Prophylactic hypOthermia to Lessen trAumatic bRain injury-Randomised Controlled Trial (POLAR-RCT) will evaluate whether early and sustained prophylactic hypothermia delivered to patients with severe traumatic brain injury improves patient-centred outcomes. METHODS:The POLAR-RCT is a multicentre, randomised, parallel group, phase III trial of early, prophylactic cooling in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury, conducted in Australia, New Zealand, France, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. A total of 511 patients aged 18-60 years have been enrolled with severe acute traumatic brain injury. The trial intervention of early and sustained prophylactic hypothermia to 33 °C for 72 h will be compared to standard normothermia maintained at a core temperature of 37 °C. The primary outcome is the proportion of favourable neurological outcomes, comprising good recovery or moderate disability, observed at six months following randomisation utilising a midpoint dichotomisation of the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE). Secondary outcomes, also assessed at six months following randomisation, include the probability of an equal or greater GOSE level, mortality, the proportions of patients with haemorrhage or infection, as well as assessment of quality of life and health economic outcomes. The planned sample size will allow 80% power to detect a 30% relative risk increase from 50% to 65% (equivalent to a 15% absolute risk increase) in favourable neurological outcome at a two-sided alpha of 0.05. DISCUSSION:Consistent with international guidelines, a detailed and prospective analysis plan has been developed for the POLAR-RCT. This plan specifies the statistical models for evaluation of primary and secondary outcomes, as well as defining covariates for adjusted analyses and methods for exploratory analyses. Application of this statistical analysis plan to the forthcoming POLAR-RCT trial will facilitate unbiased analyses of these important clinical data. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00987688 (first posted 1 October 2009); Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12609000764235 . Registered on 3 September 2009.

SUBMITTER: Presneill J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5923032 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Statistical analysis plan for the POLAR-RCT: The Prophylactic hypOthermia trial to Lessen trAumatic bRain injury-Randomised Controlled Trial.

Presneill Jeffrey J Gantner Dashiell D Nichol Alistair A McArthur Colin C Forbes Andrew A Kasza Jessica J Trapani Tony T Murray Lynnette L Bernard Stephen S Cameron Peter P Capellier Gilles G Huet Olivier O Newby Lynette L Rashford Stephen S Rosenfeld Jeffrey V JV Smith Tony T Stephenson Michael M Varma Dinesh D Vallance Shirley S Walker Tony T Webb Steve S James Cooper D D

Trials 20180427 1

<h4>Background</h4>The Prophylactic hypOthermia to Lessen trAumatic bRain injury-Randomised Controlled Trial (POLAR-RCT) will evaluate whether early and sustained prophylactic hypothermia delivered to patients with severe traumatic brain injury improves patient-centred outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>The POLAR-RCT is a multicentre, randomised, parallel group, phase III trial of early, prophylactic cooling in critically ill patients with severe traumatic brain injury, conducted in Australia, New Zealand ...[more]

PMID: 29703266

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAfter severe traumatic brain injury, induction of prophylactic hypothermia has been suggested to be neuroprotective and improve long-term neurologic outcomes.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of early prophylactic hypothermia compared with normothermic management of patients after severe traumatic brain injury.Design, setting, and participantsThe Prophylactic Hypothermia Trial to Lessen Traumatic Brain Injury-Randomized Clinical Trial (POLAR-RCT) was a multicenter randomized trial in 6 countries that recruited 511 patients both out-of-hospital and in emergency departments after severe traumatic brain injury. The first patient was enrolled on December 5, 2010, and the last on November 10, 2017. The final date of follow-up was May 15, 2018.InterventionsThere were 266 patients randomized to the prophylactic hypothermia group and 245 to normothermic management. Prophylactic hypothermia targeted the early induction of hypothermia (33°C-35°C) for at least 72 hours and up to 7 days if intracranial pressures were elevated, followed by gradual rewarming. Normothermia targeted 37°C, using surface-cooling wraps when required. Temperature was managed in both groups for 7 days. All other care was at the discretion of the treating physician.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was favorable neurologic outcomes or independent living (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score, 5-8 [scale range, 1-8]) obtained by blinded assessors 6 months after injury.ResultsAmong 511 patients who were randomized, 500 provided ongoing consent (mean age, 34.5 years [SD, 13.4]; 402 men [80.2%]) and 466 completed the primary outcome evaluation. Hypothermia was initiated rapidly after injury (median, 1.8 hours [IQR, 1.0-2.7 hours]) and rewarming occurred slowly (median, 22.5 hours [IQR, 16-27 hours]). Favorable outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score, 5-8) at 6 months occurred in 117 patients (48.8%) in the hypothermia group and 111 (49.1%) in the normothermia group (risk difference, 0.4% [95% CI, -9.4% to 8.7%]; relative risk with hypothermia, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.82-1.19]; P = .94). In the hypothermia and normothermia groups, the rates of pneumonia were 55.0% vs 51.3%, respectively, and rates of increased intracranial bleeding were 18.1% vs 15.4%, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with severe traumatic brain injury, early prophylactic hypothermia compared with normothermia did not improve neurologic outcomes at 6 months. These findings do not support the use of early prophylactic hypothermia for patients with severe traumatic brain injury.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00987688; Anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12609000764235.

Project description:BackgroundThe Erythropoietin in Traumatic Brain Injury (EPO-TBI) trial aims to determine whether the administration of erythropoietin to patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury improves patient-centred outcomes.MethodsEPO-TBI is a multicentre, blinded, randomised, parallel groups, placebo-controlled, phase III superiority trial of erythropoietin in ICU patients with traumatic brain injury conducted in Australia and New Zealand, Saudi Arabia and Europe; 606 critically ill patients aged 15 to 65 years with moderate or severe acute traumatic brain injury will be enrolled. Trial patients will receive either 40,000 IU erythropoietin or placebo by subcutaneous injection administered weekly for up to three doses during their ICU admission. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of unfavourable neurological outcomes, comprising death or severe disability, observed at 6 months following randomisation utilizing the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale. Secondary outcomes, also assessed at 6 months following randomisation, include the probability of an equal or greater Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale level, mortality, the proportions of patients with proximal deep venous thrombosis or with composite thrombotic vascular events, as well as assessment of quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The planned sample size will allow 90% power to detect a reduction from 50% to 36% in unfavourable neurological outcomes at a two-sided alpha of 0.05.DiscussionA detailed analysis plan has been developed for EPO-TBI that is consistent with international guidelines. This plan specifies the statistical models for evaluation of primary and secondary outcomes, as well as defining covariates for adjusted analyses. Application of this statistical analysis plan to the forthcoming EPO-TBI trial will facilitate unbiased analyses of these important clinical data.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12609000827235 (22 September 2009). ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00987454 (29 September 2009). European Drug Regulatory Authorities Clinical Trials: 2011-005235-22 (18 January 2012).

Project description:Background: Worldwide, traumatic brain injury (TBI) kills or hospitalises over 10 million people each year. Early intracranial bleeding is common after TBI, increasing the risk of death and disability. Tranexamic acid reduces blood loss in surgery and death due to bleeding in trauma patients with extra-cranial injury. Early administration of tranexamic acid in TBI patients might limit intracranial bleeding, reducing death and disability. The CRASH-3 trial aims to provide evidence on the effect of tranexamic acid on death and disability in TBI patients. We will randomly allocate about 13,000 TBI patients (approximately 10,000 within 3 hours of injury) to an intravenous infusion of tranexamic acid or matching placebo in addition to usual care. This paper presents a protocol update (version 2.1) and statistical analysis plan for the CRASH-3 trial. Results: The primary outcome is head injury death in hospital within 28 days of injury for patients treated within 3 hours of injury (deaths in patients treated after 3 hours will also be reported). Because there are reasons to expect that tranexamic acid will be most effective in patients treated immediately after injury and less effective with increasing delay, the effect in patients treated within one hour of injury is of particular interest. Secondary outcomes are all-cause and cause-specific mortality, vascular occlusive events, disability based on the Disability Rating Scale and measures suggested by patient representatives, seizures, neurosurgical intervention, neurosurgical blood loss, days in intensive care and adverse events. Sub-group analyses will examine the effect of tranexamic acid on head injury death stratified by time to treatment, severity of TBI and baseline risk. Conclusion: The CRASH-3 trial will provide reliable evidence of the effectiveness and safety of tranexamic acid in patients with acute TBI. Registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials registry ( ISRCTN15088122) 19/07/2011, and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01402882) 25/07/2011.

Project description:BackgroundThere are significant knowledge gaps regarding the effectiveness of serial prophylactic exchange blood transfusion (SPEBT) for pregnant women with sickle cell disease (SCD). The protocol for the randomised feasibility trial assessing SPEBT versus usual care in women with SCD (TAPS2 trial) has previously been published. This publication outlines the statistical and qualitative analysis plan for the study.Methods and designTAPS2 is a randomised two-arm phase 2 feasibility trial with a nested qualitative study and health economic evaluation. Up to 50 pregnant women with SCD and a singleton pregnancy will be recruited and individually randomised to either SPEBT approximately every 6-10 weeks until delivery (intervention arm) or to usual care (control arm). Information will be collected on a range of feasibility and clinical outcomes.ResultsDue to the impact of COVID-19 on study recruitment, the initial study period of 24 months was extended to 48 months. Other protocol updates designed to mitigate the impact of COVID-19-related disruption included allowing for remote consent and conducting all qualitative interviews by telephone. The primary outcome for the trial is the overall recruitment rate. The number of women screened, eligible, consented, randomised and withdrawn will be summarised as a CONSORT flow diagram. Differences in clinical outcomes will additionally be presented as an initial assessment of efficacy and to inform sample size calculations for a future definitive trial. Qualitative interviews with trial participants and clinicians will be analysed using reflexive thematic analysis; data from interviews with participants who declined to participate in the trial will be extracted and incorporated into summary tables to report key findings. The health economic analysis plan is not covered by this update.ConclusionThe publication of this analysis plan is designed to aid transparency and to reduce the potential for reporting bias.Trial registrationNIH registry ( www.Clinicaltrialsgov ), registration number NCT03975894 (registered 05/06/19); ISRCTN ( www.isrctn.com ), registration number ISRCTN52684446 (retrospectively registered 02/08/19).

Project description:BackgroundPsychotherapy for borderline personality disorder is often extensive and resource-intensive. Mentalisation-based therapy is a psychodynamically oriented treatment option for borderline personality disorder, which includes a case formulation, psychoeducation, and group and individual therapy. The evidence on short-term compared with long-term mentalisation-based therapy is currently unknown.Methods/designThe Short-Term MBT Project (MBT-RCT) is a single-centre, parallel-group, investigator-initiated, randomised clinical superiority trial in which short-term (20 weeks) will be compared with long-term (14 months) mentalisation-based therapy for outpatients with subthreshold or diagnosed borderline personality disorder. Outcome assessors, data managers, the data safety and monitoring committee, statisticians, and decision-makers will be blinded to treatment allocation. Participants will be assessed before randomisation and at 8, 16, and 24 months after randomisation. The primary outcome will be the severity of borderline symptomatology assessed with the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder. Secondary outcomes will be functional impairment (Work and Social Adjustment Scale), quality of life (Short-Form Health Survey 36-mental component), global functioning (Global Assessment of Functioning), and proportion of participants with severe self-harm. In this paper, we present a detailed statistical analysis plan including a comprehensive explanation of the planned statistical analyses, methods to handle missing data, and assessments of the underlying statistical assumptions. Final statistical analyses will be conducted independently by two statisticians following the present plan.DiscussionWe have developed this statistical analysis plan before unblinding of the trial results in line with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization of Good Clinical Practice Guidelines, which should increase the validity of the MBT-RCT trial by mitigation of analysis bias.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03677037 . Registered on 19 September 2018.

Project description:Use of antiplatelet therapy shortly before stroke due to spontaneous primary intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) is associated with higher case fatality in comparison to ICH without prior antithrombotic drug use. The PlAtelet Transfusion in Cerebral Haemorrhage (PATCH) trial aimed to assess the effect of platelet transfusion in patients presenting with ICH while using antiplatelet therapy. The main hypothesis of PATCH was that platelet transfusion would reduce death or dependence by reducing ICH growth.PATCH was a multicentre prospective, randomised, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE) parallel group trial, conducted at 60 hospitals in The Netherlands, Scotland and France. Forty-one sites enrolled 190 patients with spontaneous supratentorial ICH aged ?18 years, who had used antiplatelet therapy for ?7 days preceding ICH, if Glasgow Coma Scale was ?8. Participants were randomised (1:1, with a secure web-based system using permuted blocks, stratified by study centre and type of antiplatelet therapy pre-ICH) to receive either platelet transfusion within 6 hours of symptom onset and 90 minutes of diagnostic brain imaging, or standard care without platelet transfusion. The primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score assessed blind to treatment allocation at 3 months after ICH. Planned secondary outcomes included ICH growth on brain imaging performed approximately 24 hours after randomisation, survival at 3 months, disability at 3 months scored using the Amsterdam Medical Centre linear disability score, heterogeneity of treatment effect on mRS and ICH growth according to presence of the computed tomography angiography spot sign, causes of poor outcome, and cost-effectiveness. Safety outcomes were transfusion reactions, thromboembolic complications, and serious adverse events occurring during hospitalisation. This statistical analysis plan was written without knowledge of the unblinded data.The trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register on 29 April 2008 ( NTR1303 ).

Project description:Cooling may reduce infarct size and improve neurological outcomes in patients with ischaemic stroke. In phase II trials, cooling awake patients with ischaemic stroke has been shown to be feasible and safe, but the effects in functional outcomes has not yet been investigated in an adequately sized randomised clinical trial.The EuroHYP-1 trial is a multinational, randomised, superiority phase III clinical trial with masked outcome assessment testing the benefits and harms of therapeutic cooling in awake adult patients with acute ischaemic stroke. The outcomes dealt with here include the primary outcome the Rankin score (mRS) at day 91 +/-14 days after randomisation. The secondary and exploratory outcomes at day 91 +/-14 days unless otherwise stated encompassing: (1) death or dependency, defined as mRS score?>?2; (2) death; (3) National Institutes of Health Stroke Score; (4) brain infarct size at 48 +/-24 hours; (5) EQ-5D-5 L score, and (6) WHODAS 2.0 score. Other outcomes are: the primary safety outcome serious adverse events; and the incremental cost-effectiveness, and cost utility ratios. The analysis sets include (1) the intention-to-treat population, and (2) the per protocol population. The sample size is estimated to 800 patients (5% type 1 and 20% type 2 errors). All analyses are adjusted for the protocol-specified stratification variables (nationality of centre), and the minimisation variables. In the analysis, we use ordinal regression (the primary outcome), logistic regression (binary outcomes), general linear model (continuous outcomes), and the Poisson or negative binomial model (rate outcomes).Major adjustments compared with the original statistical analysis plan encompass: (1) adjustment of analyses by nationality; (2) power calculations for the secondary outcomes; (3) to address the multiplicity problem using of a fixed-sequence testing procedure starting with the primary outcome followed by the secondary outcomes ordered according to falling power; (4) assignment of worst possible score to patients who are not alive at the planned date of measurement of the continuous scores; (5) improved imputations; (6) outline of a supplementary exploratory analysis of the temperature measurements and time to death; and (7) substantial reduction of sample size.Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT01833312 . 4 April 2013.

Project description:Background: The CRASH-3 trial is a randomised trial on the effect of tranexamic acid (TXA) versus placebo on death and disability in traumatic brain injury (TBI). The CRASH-3 intracranial bleeding mechanistic study (IBMS) is a randomised trial nested within the CRASH-3 trial to examine the effect of TXA versus placebo on intracranial bleeding and infarction. Methods: Patients eligible for the CRASH-3 trial, with a GCS of 12 or less or intracranial bleeding on a pre-randomisation CT scan are eligible for the IBMS. The occurrence of intracranial bleeding, infarction, haemorrhagic oedematous lesions, mass effect and haemorrhage evacuation is examined within 28 days of randomisation using routinely collected brain scans. The primary outcome is the volume of intra-parenchymal bleeding in patients randomised within three hours of injury (adjusted for prognostic covariates). Secondary outcomes include a composite "poor" outcome, progressive and new intracranial bleeding, intracranial bleeding after neurosurgery and cerebral infarcts seen up to 28 days post-randomisation. All outcomes will be compared between treatment groups. Statistical analyses: The primary outcome will be analysed using a covariate adjusted linear mixed model. The same analysis will be done separately for patients who undergo haemorrhage evacuation post-randomisation. We will express the effect of TXA on the composite outcome, new and progressive bleeding using relative risks and 95% CIs, and on cerebral infarcts using hazard ratios and 95% CIs. We will conduct sensitivity analyses assuming missing data are MCAR or MNAR. Conclusion: The IBMS will provide information on the mechanism of action of TXA in TBI. This pre-specified statistical analysis plan is a technical extension of the published protocol. Trial registration: The CRASH-3 trial was prospectively registered at the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials registry (19 July 2011) and ClinicalTrials.gov (25 July 2011). The registries were updated with details for the IBMS on 20 December 2016.

Dataset Information

Statistical analysis plan for the POLAR-RCT: The Prophylactic hypOthermia trial to Lessen trAumatic bRain injury-Randomised Controlled Trial.

Publications

Statistical analysis plan for the POLAR-RCT: The Prophylactic hypOthermia trial to Lessen trAumatic bRain injury-Randomised Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets