Dataset Information

Statistical Decision Properties of Imprecise Trials Assessing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Drugs.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Researchers studying treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have reported findings of randomized trials comparing standard care with care augmented by experimental drugs. Many trials have small sample sizes, so estimates of treatment effects are imprecise. Hence, clinicians may find it difficult to decide when to treat patients with experimental drugs. A conventional practice when comparing standard care and an innovation is to choose the innovation only if the estimated treatment effect is positive and statistically significant. This practice defers to standard care as the status quo. We study treatment choice from the perspective of statistical decision theory, which considers treatment options symmetrically when assessing trial findings.

Methods

We use the concept of near-optimality to evaluate criteria for treatment choice. This concept jointly considers the probability and magnitude of decision errors. An appealing criterion from this perspective is the empirical success rule, which chooses the treatment with the highest observed average patient outcome in the trial.

Results

Considering the design of some COVID-19 trials, we show that the empirical success rule yields treatment choices that are much closer to optimal than those generated by prevailing decision criteria based on hypothesis tests.

Conclusion

Using trial findings to make near-optimal treatment choices rather than perform hypothesis tests should improve clinical decision making.

SUBMITTER: Manski CF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7942186 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSince the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics.MethodsThis study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias.ResultsA total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60-200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94-366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low.ConclusionsIntensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.

Project description:BackgroundMedicines for the treatment of 2019-novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections are urgently needed. However, drug screening using live 2019-nCoV requires high-level biosafety facilities, which imposes an obstacle for those institutions without such facilities or 2019-nCoV. This study aims to repurpose the clinically approved drugs for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a 2019-nCoV-related coronavirus model.MethodsA 2019-nCoV-related pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V/pangolin/2017/Guangxi was described. Whether GX_P2V uses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as the cell receptor was investigated by using small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated silencing of ACE2. The pangolin coronavirus model was used to identify drug candidates for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Two libraries of 2406 clinically approved drugs were screened for their ability to inhibit cytopathic effects on Vero E6 cells by GX_P2V infection. The anti-viral activities and anti-viral mechanisms of potential drugs were further investigated. Viral yields of RNAs and infectious particles were quantified by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and plaque assay, respectively.ResultsThe spike protein of coronavirus GX_P2V shares 92.2% amino acid identity with that of 2019-nCoV isolate Wuhan-hu-1, and uses ACE2 as the receptor for infection just like 2019-nCoV. Three drugs, including cepharanthine (CEP), selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride, exhibited complete inhibition of cytopathic effects in cell culture at 10 μmol/L. CEP demonstrated the most potent inhibition of GX_P2V infection, with a concentration for 50% of maximal effect [EC50] of 0.98 μmol/L. The viral RNA yield in cells treated with 10 μmol/L CEP was 15,393-fold lower than in cells without CEP treatment ([6.48 ± 0.02] × 10vs. 1.00 ± 0.12, t = 150.38, P < 0.001) at 72 h post-infection (p.i.). Plaque assays found no production of live viruses in media containing 10 μmol/L CEP at 48 h p.i. Furthermore, we found CEP had potent anti-viral activities against both viral entry (0.46 ± 0.12, vs.1.00 ± 0.37, t = 2.42, P < 0.05) and viral replication ([6.18 ± 0.95] × 10vs. 1.00 ± 0.43, t = 3.98, P < 0.05).ConclusionsOur pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V is a workable model for 2019-nCoV research. CEP, selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride are potential drugs for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Our results strongly suggest that CEP is a wide-spectrum inhibitor of pan-betacoronavirus, and further study of CEP for treatment of 2019-nCoV infection is warranted.