Dataset Information

The design of a Bayesian adaptive clinical trial of tranexamic acid in severely injured children

ABSTRACT:

Background

Trauma is the leading cause of death and disability in children in the USA. Tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces the blood transfusion requirements in adults and children during surgery. Several studies have evaluated TXA in adults with hemorrhagic trauma, but no randomized controlled trials have occurred in children with trauma. We propose a Bayesian adaptive clinical trial to investigate TXA in children with brain and/or torso hemorrhagic trauma.

Methods/design

We designed a double-blind, Bayesian adaptive clinical trial that will enroll up to 2000 patients. We extend the traditional Emax dose-response model to incorporate a hierarchical structure so multiple doses of TXA can be evaluated in different injury populations (isolated head injury, isolated torso injury, or both head and torso injury). Up to 3 doses of TXA (15 mg/kg, 30 mg/kg, and 45 mg/kg bolus doses) will be compared to placebo. Equal allocation between placebo, 15 mg/kg, and 30 mg/kg will be used for an initial period within each injury group. Depending on the dose-response curve, the 45 mg/kg arm may open in an injury group if there is a trend towards increasing efficacy based on the observed relationship using the data from the lower doses. Response-adaptive randomization allows each injury group to differ in allocation proportions of TXA so an optimal dose can be identified for each injury group. Frequent interim stopping periods are included to evaluate efficacy and futility. The statistical design is evaluated through extensive simulations to determine the operating characteristics in several plausible scenarios. This trial achieves adequate power in each injury group.

Discussion

This trial design evaluating TXA in pediatric hemorrhagic trauma allows for three separate injury populations to be analyzed and compared within a single study framework. Individual conclusions regarding optimal dosing of TXA can be made within each injury group. Identifying the optimal dose of TXA, if any, for various injury types in childhood may reduce death and disability.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05737-0.

SUBMITTER: VanBuren J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8567588 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe antifibrinolytic drug tranexamic acid (TXA) improves survival in adults with traumatic hemorrhage; however, the drug has not been evaluated in a trial in injured children. We assessed the feasibility of a large-scale trial evaluating the effects of TXA in children with severe hemorrhagic injuries.MethodsSeverely injured children (0 up to 18th birthday) were randomized into a double-blind randomized trial of (1) TXA 15 mg/kg bolus dose, followed by 2 mg/kg/h infusion over 8 h, (2) TXA 30 mg/kg bolus dose, followed by 4 mg/kg/h infusion over 8 h, or (3) normal saline placebo bolus and infusion. The trial was conducted at four pediatric Level I trauma centers in the United States between June 2018 and March 2020. We enrolled patients under federal exception from informed consent (EFIC) procedures when parents were unable to provide informed consent. Feasibility outcomes included the rate of enrollment, adherence to intervention arms, and ability to measure the primary clinical outcome. Clinical outcomes included global functioning (primary), working memory, total amount of blood products transfused, intracranial hemorrhage progression, and adverse events. The target enrollment rate was at least 1.25 patients per site per month.ResultsA total of 31 patients were randomized with a mean age of 10.7 years (standard deviation [SD] 5.0 years) and 22 (71%) patients were male. The mean time from injury to randomization was 2.4 h (SD 0.6 h). Sixteen (52%) patients had isolated brain injuries and 15 (48%) patients had isolated torso injuries. The enrollment rate using EFIC was 1.34 patients per site per month. All eligible enrolled patients received study intervention (nine patients TXA 15 mg/kg bolus dose, 10 patients TXA 30 mg/kg bolus dose, and 12 patients placebo) and had the primary outcome measured. No statistically significant differences in any of the clinical outcomes were identified.ConclusionBased on enrollment rate, protocol adherence, and measurement of the primary outcome in this pilot trial, we confirmed the feasibility of conducting a large-scale, randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of TXA in severely injured children with hemorrhagic brain and/or torso injuries using EFIC.

Project description:BackgroundRandomized controlled trials are considered the gold standard for evaluating experimental treatments but often require large sample sizes. Single-arm trials require smaller sample sizes but are subject to bias when using historical control data for comparative inferences. This article presents a Bayesian adaptive synthetic-control design that exploits historical control data to create a hybrid of a single-arm trial and a randomized controlled trial.MethodsThe Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design has two stages. In stage 1, a prespecified number of patients are enrolled in a single arm given the experimental treatment. Based on the stage 1 data, applying propensity score matching and Bayesian posterior prediction methods, the usefulness of the historical control data for identifying a pseudo sample of matched synthetic-control patients for making comparative inferences is evaluated. If a sufficient number of synthetic controls can be identified, the single-arm trial is continued. If not, the trial is switched to a randomized controlled trial. The performance of The Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design is evaluated by computer simulation.ResultsThe Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design achieves power and unbiasedness similar to a randomized controlled trial but on average requires a much smaller sample size, provided that the historical control data patients are sufficiently comparable to the trial patients so that a good number of matched controls can be identified in the historical control data. Compared to a single-arm trial, The Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design yields much higher power and much smaller bias.ConclusionThe Bayesian adaptive synthetic-control design provides a useful tool for exploiting historical control data to improve the efficiency of single-arm phase II clinical trials, while addressing the problem of bias when comparing trial results to historical control data. The proposed design achieves power similar to a randomized controlled trial but may require a substantially smaller sample size.