Estimands and inference in cluster-randomized vaccine trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kilpatrick KW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8273646 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Estimands and inference in cluster-randomized vaccine trials.
Kilpatrick Kayla W KW Hudgens Michael G MG Halloran M Elizabeth ME
Pharmaceutical statistics 20200505 5
Cluster-randomized trials are often conducted to assess vaccine effects. Defining estimands of interest before conducting a trial is integral to the alignment between a study's objectives and the data to be collected and analyzed. This paper considers estimands and estimators for overall, indirect, and total vaccine effects in trials, where clusters of individuals are randomized to vaccine or control. The scenario is considered where individuals self-select whether to participate in the trial, a ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCluster-randomized trials (CRTs) involve randomizing groups of individuals (e.g. hospitals, schools or villages) to different interventions. Various approaches exist for analysing CRTs but there has been little discussion around the treatment effects (estimands) targeted by each.MethodsWe describe the different estimands that can be addressed through CRTs and demonstrate how choices between different analytic approaches can impact the interpretation of results by fundamentally changing the question being asked, or, equivalently, the target estimand.ResultsCRTs can address either the participant-average treatment effect (the average treatment effect across participants) or the cluster-average treatment effect (the average treatment effect across clusters). These two estimands can differ when participant outcomes or the treatment effect depends on the cluster size (referred to as 'informative cluster size'), which can occur for reasons such as differences in staffing levels or types of participants between small and large clusters. Furthermore, common estimators, such as mixed-effects models or generalized estimating equations with an exchangeable working correlation structure, can produce biased estimates for both the participant-average and cluster-average treatment effects when cluster size is informative. We describe alternative estimators (independence estimating equations and cluster-level analyses) that are unbiased for CRTs even when informative cluster size is present.ConclusionWe conclude that careful specification of the estimand at the outset can ensure that the study question being addressed is clear and relevant, and, in turn, that the selected estimator provides an unbiased estimate of the desired quantity.
| S-EPMC9908044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ICH E9 addendum introduces the term intercurrent event to refer to events that happen after treatment initiation and that can either preclude observation of the outcome of interest or affect its interpretation. It proposes five strategies for handling intercurrent events to form an estimand but does not suggest statistical methods for estimation. In this article we focus on the hypothetical strategy, where the treatment effect is defined under the hypothetical scenario in which the intercurrent event is prevented. For its estimation, we consider causal inference and missing data methods. We establish that certain "causal inference estimators" are identical to certain "missing data estimators." These links may help those familiar with one set of methods but not the other. Moreover, using potential outcome notation allows us to state more clearly the assumptions on which missing data methods rely to estimate hypothetical estimands. This helps to indicate whether estimating a hypothetical estimand is reasonable, and what data should be used in the analysis. We show that hypothetical estimands can be estimated by exploiting data after intercurrent event occurrence, which is typically not used. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.
| S-EPMC10228513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A practical limitation of cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) is that the number of available clusters may be small, resulting in an increased risk of baseline imbalance under simple randomization. Constrained randomization overcomes this issue by restricting the allocation to a subset of randomization schemes where sufficient overall covariate balance across comparison arms is achieved. However, for multi-arm cRCTs, several design and analysis issues pertaining to constrained randomization have not been fully investigated. Motivated by an ongoing multi-arm cRCT, we elaborate the method of constrained randomization and provide a comprehensive evaluation of the statistical properties of model-based and randomization-based tests under both simple and constrained randomization designs in multi-arm cRCTs, with varying combinations of design and analysis-based covariate adjustment strategies. In particular, as randomization-based tests have not been extensively studied in multi-arm cRCTs, we additionally develop most-powerful randomization tests under the linear mixed model framework for our comparisons. Our results indicate that under constrained randomization, both model-based and randomization-based analyses could gain power while preserving nominal type I error rate, given proper analysis-based adjustment for the baseline covariates. Randomization-based analyses, however, are more robust against violations of distributional assumptions. The choice of balance metrics and candidate set sizes and their implications on the testing of the pairwise and global hypotheses are also discussed. Finally, we caution against the design and analysis of multi-arm cRCTs with an extremely small number of clusters, due to insufficient degrees of freedom and the tendency to obtain an overly restricted randomization space.
| S-EPMC9007899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In a cross-sectional stepped wedge cluster randomized trial (SWT), clusters are randomized to crossover from control to intervention at different time periods and outcomes are assessed for a different set of individuals in each cluster-period. Randomization-based inference is an attractive analysis strategy for SWTs because it does not require full parametric specification of the outcome distribution or correlation structure and its validity does not rely on having a large number of clusters. Existing randomization-based approaches for SWTs, however, either focus on hypothesis testing and omit technical details on confidence interval (CI) calculation with noncontinuous outcomes, or employ weighted cluster-period summary statistics for p-value and CI calculation, which can result in suboptimal efficiency if weights do not incorporate information on varying cluster-period sizes. In this article, we propose a framework for calculating randomization-based p-values and CIs for a marginal treatment effect in SWTs by using test statistics derived from individual-level generalized linear models. We also investigate how study design features, such as stratified randomization, subsequently impact various SWT analysis methods including the proposed approach. Data from the XpertMTB/RIF tuberculosis trial are reanalyzed to illustrate our method and compare it to alternatives.
| S-EPMC9014477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Measuring the treatment effect on recurrent events like hospitalization in the presence of death has long challenged statisticians and clinicians alike. Traditional inference on the cumulative frequency unjustly penalizes survivorship as longer survivors also tend to experience more adverse events. Expanding a recently suggested idea of the "while-alive" event rate, we consider a general class of such estimands that adjust for the length of survival without losing causal interpretation. Given a user-specified loss function that allows for arbitrary weighting, we define as estimand the average loss experienced per unit time alive within a target period and use the ratio of this loss rate to measure the effect size. Scaling the loss rate by the width of the corresponding time window gives us an alternative, and sometimes more photogenic, way of showing the data. To make inferences, we construct a nonparametric estimator for the loss rate through the cumulative loss and the restricted mean survival time and derive its influence function in closed form for variance estimation and testing. As simulations and analysis of real data from a heart failure trial both show, the while-alive approach corrects for the false attenuation of treatment effect due to patients living longer under treatment, with increased statistical power as a result. The proposed methods are implemented in the R-package WA, which is publicly available from the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN).
| S-EPMC9772359 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRandomized trials for the treatment of tuberculosis (TB) rely on a composite primary outcome to capture unfavorable treatment responses. However, variability between trials in the outcome definition and estimation methods complicates across-trial comparisons and hinders the advancement of treatment guidelines. The International Council for Harmonization (ICH) provides international regulatory standards for clinical trials. The estimand framework outlined in the recent ICH E9(R1) addendum offers a timely opportunity for randomized trials of TB treatment to adopt broadly standardized outcome definitions and analytic approaches. We previously proposed and defined four estimands for use in this context. Our objective was to evaluate how the use of these estimands and choice of estimation method impacts results and interpretation of a large phase III TB trial.MethodsWe reanalyzed participant-level data from the REMoxTB trial. We applied four estimands and various methods of estimation to assess non-inferiority of both novel 4-month treatment regimens against standard of care.ResultsWith each of the four estimands, we reached the same conclusion as the original trial analysis that the novel regimens were not non-inferior to standard of care. Each estimand and method of estimation gave similar estimates of the treatment effect with fluctuations in variance and differences driven by the methods applied for handling intercurrent events.ConclusionsOur application of estimands defined by the ICH E9 (R1) addendum offers a formalized framework for addressing the primary TB treatment trial objective and can promote uniformity in future trials by limiting heterogeneity in trial outcome definitions. We demonstrated the utility of our proposal using data from the REMoxTB randomized trial. We outlined methods for estimating each estimand and found consistent conclusions across estimands. We recommend future late-phase TB treatment trials to implement some or all of our estimands to promote rigorous outcome definitions and reduce variability between trials.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00864383. Registered on March 2009.
| S-EPMC10929173 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRandomized trials for the treatment of tuberculosis (TB) rely on a composite primary outcome to capture unfavorable treatment responses. However, variability between trials in the outcome definition and estimation methods complicates across-trial comparisons and hinders the advancement of treatment guidelines. The International Council for Harmonization (ICH) provides international regulatory standards for clinical trials. The estimand framework outlined in the recent ICH E9(R1) addendum offers a timely opportunity for randomized trials of TB treatment to adopt broadly standardized outcome definitions and analytic approaches. We previously proposed and defined four estimands for use in this context. Our objective was to evaluate how the use of these estimands and choice of estimation method impacts results and interpretation of a large phase III TB trial.MethodsWe reanalyzed participant level data from the REMoxTB trial. We applied four estimands and various methods of estimation to assess non-inferiority of both novel 4-month treatment regimens against standard of care.ResultsWith each of the four estimands we reached the same conclusion as the original trial analysis; that the novel regimens were not non-inferior to standard of care. Each estimand and method of estimation gave similar estimates of the treatment effect with fluctuations in variance and differences driven by the methods applied for handling intercurrent events.ConclusionsOur application of estimands defined by the ICH E9(R1) addendum offers a formalized framework for addressing the primary TB treatment trial objective and can promote uniformity in future trials by limiting heterogeneity in trial outcome definitions. We demonstrated the utility of our proposal using data from the REMoxTB randomized trial. We outlined methods for estimating each estimand and found consistent conclusions across estimands. We recommend future late-phase TB treatment trials to implement some or all of our estimands to promote rigorous outcome definitions and reduce variability between trials.Trial registration: NCT00864383.
| S-EPMC10659528 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In randomized studies involving severely ill patients, functional outcomes are often unobserved due to missed clinic visits, premature withdrawal, or death. It is well known that if these unobserved functional outcomes are not handled properly, biased treatment comparisons can be produced. In this article, we propose a procedure for comparing treatments that is based on a composite endpoint that combines information on both the functional outcome and survival. We further propose a missing data imputation scheme and sensitivity analysis strategy to handle the unobserved functional outcomes not due to death. Illustrations of the proposed method are given by analyzing data from a recent non-small cell lung cancer clinical trial and a recent trial of sedation interruption among mechanically ventilated patients.
| S-EPMC6383567 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWithin cluster randomized trials no algorithms exist to generate a full enumeration of a block randomization, balancing for covariates across treatment arms. Furthermore, often for practical reasons multiple blocks are required to fully randomize a study, which may not have been well balanced within blocks.ResultsWe present a convenient and easy to use randomization tool to undertake allocation concealed block randomization. Our algorithm highlights allocations that minimize imbalance between treatment groups across multiple baseline covariates. We demonstrate the algorithm using a cluster randomized trial in primary care (the PRE-EMPT Study) and show that the software incorporates a trade off between independent random allocations that were likely to be imbalanced, and predictable deterministic approaches that would minimise imbalance. We extend the methodology of single block randomization to allocate to multiple blocks conditioning on previous allocations.ConclusionThe algorithm is included as Additional file 1 and we advocate its use for robust randomization within cluster randomized trials.
| S-EPMC2588445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) have been widely used in field experiments treating a cluster of individuals as the unit of randomization. This study focused particularly on situations where CRTs are accompanied by a common complication, namely, treatment noncompliance or, more generally, intervention nonadherence. In CRTs, compliance may be related not only to individual characteristics but also to the environment of clusters individuals belong to. Therefore, analyses ignoring the connection between compliance and clustering may not provide valid results. Although randomized field experiments often suffer from both noncompliance and clustering of the data, these features have been studied as separate rather than concurrent problems. On the basis of Monte Carlo simulations, this study demonstrated how clustering and noncompliance may affect statistical inferences and how these two complications can be accounted for simultaneously. In particular, the effect of the intervention on individuals who not only were assigned to active intervention but also abided by this intervention assignment (complier average causal effect) was the focus. For estimation of intervention effects considering noncompliance and data clustering, an ML-EM estimation method was employed.
| S-EPMC2917590 | biostudies-literature