Asymmetrical regulation of blood pressure in the rat medulla

T. Shiozaki,M. Taneda,M. Yasuda,A. Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-8993(97)00193-5

IF: 3.61

1997-04-01

Brain Research

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Human genomics: Enjoy the complete coverage

M. Skipper

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1484

IF: 59.581

Nature Reviews Genetics

Abstract:
Outcomes truncated by death in RCTs: a simulation study on the survivor average causal effect

Stefanie von Felten,Chiara Vanetta,Christoph M. Rüegger,Sven Wellmann,Leonhard Held

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.11991

2024-07-12

Abstract:Continuous outcome measurements truncated by death present a challenge for the estimation of unbiased treatment effects in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). One way to deal with such situations is to estimate the survivor average causal effect (SACE), but this requires making non-testable assumptions. Motivated by an ongoing RCT in very preterm infants with intraventricular hemorrhage, we performed a simulation study to compare a SACE estimator with complete case analysis (CCA) and an analysis after multiple imputation of missing outcomes. We set up 9 scenarios combining positive, negative and no treatment effect on the outcome (cognitive development) and on survival at 2 years of age. Treatment effect estimates from all methods were compared in terms of bias, mean squared error and coverage with regard to two true treatment effects: the treatment effect on the outcome used in the simulation and the SACE, which was derived by simulation of both potential outcomes per patient. Despite targeting different estimands (principal stratum estimand, hypothetical estimand), the SACE-estimator and multiple imputation gave similar estimates of the treatment effect and efficiently reduced the bias compared to CCA. Also, both methods were relatively robust to omission of one covariate in the analysis, and thus violation of relevant assumptions. Although the SACE is not without controversy, we find it useful if mortality is inherent to the study population. Some degree of violation of the required assumptions is almost certain, but may be acceptable in practice.

Methodology
The implications of outcome truncation in reproductive medicine RCTs: a simulation platform for trialists and simulation study

Jack Wilkinson,Jonathan Y. Huang,Antonia Marsden,Michael O. Harhay,Andy Vail,Stephen A. Roberts

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05482-4

IF: 2.728

2021-08-06

Trials

Abstract:Abstract Background Randomised controlled trials in reproductive medicine are often subject to outcome truncation, where the study outcomes are only defined in a subset of the randomised cohort. Examples include birthweight (measurable only in the subgroup of participants who give birth) and miscarriage (which can only occur in participants who become pregnant). These outcomes are typically analysed by making a comparison between treatment arms within the subgroup (for example, comparing birthweights in the subgroup who gave birth or miscarriages in the subgroup who became pregnant). However, this approach does not represent a randomised comparison when treatment influences the probability of being observed (i.e. survival). The practical implications of this for the design and interpretation of reproductive trials are unclear however. Methods We developed a simulation platform to investigate the implications of outcome truncation for reproductive medicine trials. We used this to perform a simulation study, in which we considered the bias, type 1 error, coverage, and precision of standard statistical analyses for truncated continuous and binary outcomes. Simulation settings were informed by published assisted reproduction trials. Results Increasing treatment effect on the intermediate variable, strength of confounding between the intermediate and outcome variables, and the presence of an interaction between treatment and confounder were found to adversely affect performance. However, within parameter ranges we would consider to be more realistic, the adverse effects were generally not drastic. For binary outcomes, the study highlighted that outcome truncation could cause separation in smaller studies, where none or all of the participants in a study arm experience the outcome event. This was found to have severe consequences for inferences. Conclusion We have provided a simulation platform that can be used by researchers in the design and interpretation of reproductive medicine trials subject to outcome truncation and have used this to conduct a simulation study. The study highlights several key factors which trialists in the field should consider carefully to protect against erroneous inferences. Standard analyses of truncated binary outcomes in small studies may be highly biassed, and it remains to identify suitable approaches for analysing data in this context.

medicine, research & experimental
Optimality of testing procedures for survival data

Andrea Arfé,Brian Alexander,Lorenzo Trippa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1902.00161

2020-05-27

Abstract:Most statistical tests for treatment effects used in randomized clinical trials with survival outcomes are based on the proportional hazards assumption, which often fails in practice. Data from early exploratory studies may provide evidence of non-proportional hazards which can guide the choice of alternative tests in the design of practice-changing confirmatory trials. We study a test to detect treatment effects in a late-stage trial which accounts for the deviations from proportional hazards suggested by early-stage data. Conditional on early-stage data, among all tests which control the frequentist Type I error rate at a fixed $\alpha$ level, our testing procedure maximizes the Bayesian prediction of the finite-sample power. Hence, the proposed test provides a useful benchmark for other tests commonly used in presence of non-proportional hazards, for example weighted log-rank tests. We illustrate the approach in a simulations based on data from a published cancer immunotherapy phase III trial.

Statistics Theory,Methodology
The Number of Patients Lost to Follow-Up May Exceed the Fragility Index of a Randomized Controlled Trial Without Reversing Statistical Significance: A Systematic Review and Statistical Model

Jacob F Oeding,Aaron J Krych,Christopher L Camp,Nathan H Varady

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2024.05.006

2024-05-21

Abstract:Purpose: To (1) analyze trends in the publishing of statistical fragility index (FI)-based systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature, including the prevalence of misleading or inaccurate statements related to the statistical fragility of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and patients lost to follow-up (LTF), and (2) determine whether RCTs with relatively "low" FIs are truly as sensitive to patients LTF as previously portrayed in the literature. Methods: All FI-based studies published in the orthopaedic literature were identified using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science Core Collection, PubMed, and MEDLINE databases. All articles involving application of the FI or reverse FI to study the statistical fragility of studies in orthopaedics were eligible for inclusion in the study. Study characteristics, median FIs and sample sizes, and misleading or inaccurate statements related to the FI and patients LTF were recorded. Misleading or inaccurate statements-defined as those basing conclusions of trial fragility on the false assumption that adding patients LTF back to a trial has the same statistical effect as existing patients in a trial experiencing the opposite outcome-were determined by 2 authors. A theoretical RCT with a sample size of 100, P = .006, and FI of 4 was used to evaluate the difference in effect on statistical significance between flipping outcome events of patients already included in the trial (FI) and adding patients LTF back to the trial to show the true sensitivity of RCTs to patients LTF. Results: Of the 39 FI-based studies, 37 (95%) directly compared the FI with the number of patients LTF. Of these 37 studies, 22 (59%) included a statement regarding the FI and patients LTF that was determined to be inaccurate or misleading. In the theoretical RCT, a reversal of significance was not observed until 7 patients LTF (nearly twice the FI) were added to the trial in the distribution of maximal significance reversal. Conclusions: The claim that any RCT in which the number of patients LTF exceeds the FI could potentially have its significance reversed simply by maintaining study follow-ups is commonly inaccurate and prevalent in orthopaedic studies applying the FI. Patients LTF and the FI are not equivalent. The minimum number of patients LTF required to flip the significance of a typical RCT was shown to be greater than the FI, suggesting that RCTs with relatively low FIs may not be as sensitive to patients LTF as previously portrayed in the literature; however, only a holistic approach that considers the context in which the trial was conducted, potential biases, and study results can determine the merits of any particular RCT. Clinical relevance: Surgeons may benefit from re-examining their interpretation of prior FI reviews that have made claims of substantial RCT fragility based on comparisons between the FI and patients LTF; it is possible the results are more robust than previously believed.
Time-to-event estimands and loss to follow-up in oncology in light of the estimands framework

Jonathan Siegel,Hans-Jochen Weber,Stefan Englert,Feng Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.01781

2023-07-21

Abstract:Time-to-event estimands are central to many oncology clinical trials. The estimand framework (addendum to the ICH E9 guideline) calls for precisely defining the treatment effect of interest to align with the clinical question of interest and requires predefining the handling of intercurrent events that occur after treatment initiation and either preclude the observation of an event of interest or impact the interpretation of the treatment effect. We discuss a practical problem in clinical trial design and execution, i.e. in some clinical contexts it is not feasible to systematically follow patients to an event of interest. Loss to follow-up in the presence of intercurrent events can affect the meaning and interpretation of the study results. We provide recommendations for trial design, stressing the need for close alignment of the clinical question of interest and study design, impact on data collection and other practical implications. When patients cannot be systematically followed, compromise may be necessary to select the best available estimand that can be feasibly estimated under the circumstances. We discuss the use of sensitivity and supplementary analyses to examine assumptions of interest.

Applications
Exploring Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials When Some of the Patients are Treated against the Randomization

Zhao Ziqiang,Zheng Ming

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-3674.2010.03.011

2010-01-01

Abstract:Objective To explore adequate methods for statistical analysis when some of the patients are treated against the randomization.Methods Simulation studies were conducted to see if the probability of the TYPE I error for each method is not greater than α and to compare the power of the methods with probability of TYPE I error not greater than α.Results When some of the patients are treated against the randomization,the probability of the TYPE I error for the t test based on the treatment eventually administered is far greater than α,while the probability of the TYPE I error for ITT t test and the ANCOVA based on the treatment eventually administered has a 95% confidence interval containing α.Conclusion When some of the patients are treated against the randomization,the t test based on the treatment eventually administered is not an appropriate method,while the ITT t test and the ANCOVA based on the treatment eventually administered are able to control the probability of TYPE I error around α;the ANCOVA based on the treatment eventually administered has a higher power than the ITT t test.
A simulation study of methods for handling disease progression in dose-finding clinical trials

Lucie Biard,Bin Cheng,Gulam A. Manji,Shing M. Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1909.02913

2019-09-06

Abstract:In traditional dose-finding studies, dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is determined within a fixed time observation window where DLT is often defined as a binary outcome. In the setting of oncology dose-finding trials, often patients in advanced stage of diseases are enrolled. Therefore, disease progression may occur within the DLT observation window leading to treatment discontinuation and rendering the patient unevaluable for DLT assessment. As a result, additional patients have to be enrolled, increasing the sample size. We propose and compare several practical methods for handling disease progression which occurs within the DLT observation window, in the context of the time-to-event continual reassessment method (TITE-CRM) which allows using partial observations. The methods differ on the way they define an evaluable patient and in the way incomplete observations are included. The methods are illustrated and contrasted in the context of a single simulated trial, and compared via simulations under various scenarios of dose-progression relationship, in the setting of advanced soft-tissue sarcoma.

Applications
Assessing loss to follow-up in the MObile Technology for Improved Family Planning (MOTIF) randomised controlled trial

Chris Smith,Christopher Jarvis,Caroline Free

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2316-6

IF: 2.728

2017-12-01

Trials

Abstract:Background: Loss to follow-up (LTFU) in clinical trials is an important source of bias that can affect statistical power and generalisability of findings. The aim of this paper is to assess factors associated with LTFU in the MObile Technology for Improved Family Planning (MOTIF) trial in Cambodia and compare how the result might have varied using different analytical methods. Methods: Follow-up in the MOTIF trial was 86% at 4 months and 66% at 12 months. For the primary analysis, we undertook a complete case analysis, similar to the approach used in similar trials of interventions delivered by mobile phone to increase contraception use. We conducted an exploratory analysis and found that factors associated with LTFU were young age, lower socio-economic status, not planning to use post-abortion contraception, availability of phone credit and not providing additional contact numbers. We then undertook two analyses to estimate the effect of the intervention on the primary outcome at 4 and 12 months for comparison with the complete case analysis. First, we undertook multiple imputation, and second we conducted an analysis treating all participants' LTFU as non-users of contraception. Results: Using multiple imputation, we found that the risk ratio was slightly increased at 4 months and slightly decreased at 12 months compared with the complete case analysis. When counting all participants' LTFU as non-users of contraception, we observed that, compared with the complete case analysis, the risk ratio was slightly decreased at 4 months and slightly increased at 12 months. Despite the changes in the risk ratio, use of the different analytical methods did not result in an effect using the complete case analysis becoming statistically significant or vice versa. Conclusion: Future studies assessing contraception use might anticipate increased attrition amongst younger participants, those of lower socio-economic status or those who do not provide additional contact details. Attrition could be reduced by collecting as many contact details as possible, by providing incentives and possibly by enhanced counselling to groups at higher risk of LTFU on recruitment. Multiple imputation should be considered in addition to complete case analysis if LTFU not missing at random is expected or observed. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01823861 . Registered on 30 March 2013.
Estimation of treatment effects following a sequential trial of multiple treatments

John Whitehead,Yasin Desai,Thomas Jaki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1906.11324

2019-06-27

Abstract:When a clinical trial is subject to a series of interim analyses as a result of which the study may be terminated or modified, final frequentist analyses need to take account of the design used. Failure to do so may result in overstated levels of significance, biased effect estimates and confidence intervals with inadequate coverage probabilities. A wide variety of valid methods of frequentist analysis have been devised for sequential designs comparing a single experimental treatment with a single control treatment. It is less clear how to perform the final analysis of a sequential or adaptive design applied in a more complex setting, for example to determine which treatment or set of treatments amongst several candidates should be recommended. This paper has been motivated by consideration of a trial in which four treatments for sepsis are to be compared, with interim analyses allowing the dropping of treatments or termination of the trial to declare a single winner or to conclude that there is little difference between the treatments that remain. The approach taken is based on the method of Rao-Blackwellisation which enhances the accuracy of unbiased estimates available from the first interim analysis by taking their conditional expectations given final sufficient statistics. Analytic approaches to determine such expectations are difficult and specific to the details of the design, and instead "reverse simulations" are conducted to construct replicate realisations of the first interim analysis from the final test statistics. The method also provides approximate confidence intervals for the differences between treatments.

Methodology
[Causal treatment of Hymenoptera sting allergy. Clinical experiences and serologic control (specific IgE- and IG-antibodies) during hyposensitization with bee and wasp venoms].

L. Mokry,B. Wüthrich,R. Dietschi

1985-09-17

Abstract:
Causal Inference with Outcomes Truncated by Death and Missing Not at Random

Wei Li,Yuan Liu,Shanshan Luo,Zhi Geng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2406.10554

2024-06-15

Methodology

Abstract:In clinical trials, principal stratification analysis is commonly employed to address the issue of truncation by death, where a subject dies before the outcome can be measured. However, in practice, many survivor outcomes may remain uncollected or be missing not at random, posing a challenge to standard principal stratification analyses. In this paper, we explore the identification, estimation, and bounds of the average treatment effect within a subpopulation of individuals who would potentially survive under both treatment and control conditions. We show that the causal parameter of interest can be identified by introducing a proxy variable that affects the outcome only through the principal strata, while requiring that the treatment variable does not directly affect the missingness mechanism. Subsequently, we propose an approach for estimating causal parameters and derive nonparametric bounds in cases where identification assumptions are violated. We illustrate the performance of the proposed method through simulation studies and a real dataset obtained from a Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) study.
Stratified modestly-weighted log-rank tests in settings with an anticipated delayed separation of survival curves

Dominic Magirr,José L. Jiménez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.10445

2022-01-26

Abstract:Delayed separation of survival curves is a common occurrence in confirmatory studies in immuno-oncology. Many novel statistical methods that aim to efficiently capture potential long-term survival improvements have been proposed in recent years. However, the vast majority do not consider stratification, which is a major limitation considering that most (if not all) large confirmatory studies currently employ a stratified primary analysis. In this article, we combine recently proposed weighted log-rank tests that have been designed to work well under a delayed separation of survival curves, with stratification by a baseline variable. The aim is to increase the efficiency of the test when the stratifying variable is highly prognostic for survival. As there are many potential ways to combine the two techniques, we compare several possibilities in an extensive simulation study. We also apply the techniques retrospectively to two recent randomized clinical trials.

Methodology
Design and Analysis of group-sequential clinical trials based on a modestly-weighted log-rank test in anticipation of a delayed separation of survival curves: A practical guidance

Dominic Magirr,José L. Jiménez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2102.05535

2021-08-26

Abstract:A common feature of many recent trials evaluating the effects of immunotherapy on survival is that non-proportional hazards can be anticipated at the design stage. This raises the possibility to use a statistical method tailored towards testing the purported long-term benefit, rather than applying the more standard log-rank test and/or Cox model. Many such proposals have been made in recent years, but there remains a lack of practical guidance on implementation, particularly in the context of group-sequential designs. In this article, we aim to fill this gap. We discuss how the POPLAR trial, which compared immunotherapy versus chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer, might have been re-designed to be more robust to the presence of a delayed effect. We then provide step-by-step instructions on how to analyse a hypothetical realisation of the trial, based on this new design. Basic theory on weighted log-rank tests and group-sequential methods is covered, and an accompanying R package (including vignette) is provided.

Applications
Quantifying treatment differences in confirmatory trials under non-proportional hazards

José L. Jiménez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2020.1815673

IF: 1.416

2020-09-03

Journal of Applied Statistics

Abstract:Proportional hazards are a common assumption when designing confirmatory clinical trials in oncology. With the emergence of immunotherapy and novel targeted therapies, departure from the proportional hazard assumption is not rare in nowadays clinical research. Under non-proportional hazards, the hazard ratio does not have a straightforward clinical interpretation, and the log-rank test is no longer the most powerful statistical test even though it is still valid. Nevertheless, the log-rank test and the hazard ratio are still the primary analysis tools, and traditional approaches such as sample size increase are still proposed to account for the impact of non-proportional hazards. The weighed log-rank test and the test based on the restricted mean survival time (RMST) are receiving a lot of attention as a potential alternative to the log-rank test. We conduct a simulation study comparing the performance and operating characteristics of the log-rank test, the weighted log-rank test and the test based on the RMST, including a treatment effect estimation, under different non-proportional hazards patterns. Results show that, under non-proportional hazards, the hazard ratio and weighted hazard ratio have no straightforward clinical interpretation whereas the RMST ratio can be interpreted regardless of the proportional hazards assumption. In terms of power, the RMST achieves a similar performance when compared to the log-rank test.

statistics & probability
Association of differential censoring with survival and suboptimal control arms among oncology clinical trials

Eric J Hsu,Timothy A Lin,Dor R Dabush,Zachary McCaw,Alex Koong,Christine Lin,Joseph Abi Jaoude,Roshal Patel,Ramez Kouzy,Molly B El Alam,Sonal Noticewala,Yumeng Yang,Alexander D Sherry,Clifton D Fuller,Charles R Thomas,Chad Tang,Pavlos Msaouel,Prajnan Das,Bo Huang,Lu Tian,Ryan Sun,J Jack Lee,Tomer Meirson,Ethan B Ludmir

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djae028

2024-02-09

Abstract:Abstract Differential censoring, which refers to censoring imbalance between treatment arms, may bias the interpretation of survival outcomes in clinical trials. In 146 phase III oncology trials with statistically significant time-to-event surrogate primary endpoints, we evaluated the association between differential censoring in the surrogate primary endpoints, control arm adequacy, and the subsequent statistical significance of overall survival results. Twenty-four (16%) trials exhibited differential censoring that favored the control arm, whereas 15 (10%) exhibited differential censoring that favored the experimental arm. Positive overall survival was more common in control arm differential censoring trials (63%) than in trials without differential censoring (37%) or with experimental arm differential censoring (47%; odds ratio = 2.64, 95% confidence interval = 1.10 to 7.20; P = .04). Control arm differential censoring trials more frequently used suboptimal control arms at 46% compared with 20% without differential censoring and 13% with experimental arm differential censoring (odds ratio = 3.60, 95% confidence interval = 1.29 to 10.0; P = .007). The presence of control arm differential censoring in trials with surrogate primary endpoints, especially in those with overall survival conversion, may indicate an inadequate control arm and should be examined and explained.

oncology
Adjusting for time-varying treatment switches in randomized clinical trials: the danger of extrapolation and how to avoid it

Hege Michiels,An Vandebosch,Stijn Vansteelandt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.06099

2023-03-10

Applications

Abstract:When choosing estimands and estimators in randomized clinical trials, caution is warranted as intercurrent events, such as - due to patients who switch treatment after disease progression, are often extreme. Statistical analyses may then easily lure one into making large implicit extrapolations, which often go unnoticed. We will illustrate this problem of implicit extrapolations using a real oncology case study, with a right-censored time-to-event endpoint, in which patients can cross over from the control to the experimental treatment after disease progression, for ethical reasons. We resolve this by developing an estimator for the survival risk ratio contrasting the survival probabilities at each time t if all patients would take experimental treatment with the survival probabilities at those times t if all patients would take control treatment up to time t, using randomization as an instrumental variable to avoid reliance on no unmeasured confounders assumptions. This doubly robust estimator can handle time-varying treatment switches and right-censored survival times. Insight into the rationale behind the estimator is provided and the approach is demonstrated by re-analyzing the oncology trial.
The impact of different censoring methods for analyzing survival using real-world data with linked mortality information: a simulation study

Wei-Chun Hsu,Aaron Crowley,Craig S Parzynski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-024-02313-3

2024-09-13

Abstract:Background: Evaluating outcome reliability is critical in real-world evidence studies. Overall survival is a common outcome in these studies; however, its capture in real-world data (RWD) sources is often incomplete and supplemented with linked mortality information from external sources. Conflicting recommendations exist for censoring overall survival in real-world evidence studies. This simulation study aimed to understand the impact of different censoring methods on estimating median survival and log hazard ratios when external mortality information is partially captured. Methods: We used Monte Carlo simulation to emulate a non-randomized comparative effectiveness study of two treatments with RWD from electronic health records and linked external mortality data. We simulated the time to death, the time to last database activity, and the time to data cutoff. Death events after the last database activity were attributed to linked external mortality data and randomly set to missing to reflect the sensitivity of contemporary real-world data sources. Two censoring schemes were evaluated: (1) censoring at the last activity date and (2) censoring at the end of data availability (data cutoff) without an observed death. We assessed the performance of each method in estimating median survival and log hazard ratios using bias, coverage, variance, and rejection rate under varying amounts of incomplete mortality information and varying treatment effects, length of follow-up, and sample size. Results: When mortality information was fully captured, median survival estimates were unbiased when censoring at data cutoff and underestimated when censoring at the last activity. When linked mortality information was missing, censoring at the last activity date underestimated the median survival, while censoring at the data cutoff overestimated it. As missing linked mortality information increased, bias decreased when censoring at the last activity date and increased when censoring at data cutoff. Conclusions: Researchers should consider the completeness of linked external mortality information when choosing how to censor the analysis of overall survival using RWD. Substantial bias in median survival estimates can occur if an inappropriate censoring scheme is selected. We advocate for RWD providers to perform validation studies of their mortality data and publish their findings to inform methodological decisions better.
Combining Recurrent and Terminal Events Into a Composite Endpoint May Be Problematic

Xiaofei Liu,Norbert Benda,Clemens Mittmann,Armin Koch

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19466315.2024.2395404

2024-09-25

Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research

Abstract:In clinical trials for chronic heart failure (CHF), time to a composite of first hospitalization for worsening heart failure or death is a widely accepted primary efficacy measure. Motivated by lower event rates in recent CHF trials, there are proposals to use endpoints accounting for recurrent heart failure hospitalization (HFH) events (e.g., recurrent HFH events plus death as an additional event) as the primary endpoint to better quantify disease burden and to improve trial efficiency. However, analysis and interpretation of recurrent event endpoints may be complicated by the terminal event death. In a previous simulation study it was shown that the Type I error rate was well-controlled for the analysis of the composite recurrent event endpoint using the negative binomial (NB) model and the Lin-Wei-Yang-Ying (LWYY) model. As these results were based on limited scenarios, we extended the previous simulation study and identified situations where the Type I error rate is no longer controlled for the analysis of the composite recurrent event endpoint using the LWYY model, despite a neutral effect on HFH and a detrimental effect on death of the experimental treatment. Therefore, depending on clinical settings, the LWYY model should be applied and interpreted with more caution.

mathematical & computational biology,statistics & probability
Covariate-adjusted Group Sequential Comparisons of Survival Probabilities

Peter Zhang,Brent Logan,Michael Martens

2024-03-26

Abstract:In confirmatory clinical trials, survival outcomes are frequently studied and interim analyses for efficacy and/or futility are often desirable. Methods such as the log rank test and Cox regression model are commonly used to compare treatments in this setting. They rely on a proportional hazards (PH) assumption and are subject to type I error rate inflation and loss of power when PH are violated. Such violations may be expected a priori, particularly when the mechanisms of treatments differ such as immunotherapy vs. chemotherapy for treating cancer. We develop group sequential tests for comparing survival curves with covariate adjustment that allow for interim analyses in the presence of non-PH and offer easily interpreted, clinically meaningful summary measures of the treatment effect. The joint distribution of repeatedly computed test statistics converges to the canonical joint distribution with a Markov structure. The asymptotic distribution of the test statistics allows marginal comparisons of survival probabilities at multiple fixed time points and facilitates both critical value specification to maintain type I error control and sample size/power determination. Simulations demonstrate that the achieved type I error rate and power of the proposed tests meet targeted levels and are robust to the PH assumption and covariate influence. The proposed tests are illustrated using a clinical trial dataset from the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network 1101 trial.

Methodology

Asymmetrical regulation of blood pressure in the rat medulla

Human genomics: Enjoy the complete coverage

Outcomes truncated by death in RCTs: a simulation study on the survivor average causal effect

The implications of outcome truncation in reproductive medicine RCTs: a simulation platform for trialists and simulation study

Optimality of testing procedures for survival data

The Number of Patients Lost to Follow-Up May Exceed the Fragility Index of a Randomized Controlled Trial Without Reversing Statistical Significance: A Systematic Review and Statistical Model

Time-to-event estimands and loss to follow-up in oncology in light of the estimands framework

Exploring Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials When Some of the Patients are Treated against the Randomization

A simulation study of methods for handling disease progression in dose-finding clinical trials

Assessing loss to follow-up in the MObile Technology for Improved Family Planning (MOTIF) randomised controlled trial

Estimation of treatment effects following a sequential trial of multiple treatments

[Causal treatment of Hymenoptera sting allergy. Clinical experiences and serologic control (specific IgE- and IG-antibodies) during hyposensitization with bee and wasp venoms].

Causal Inference with Outcomes Truncated by Death and Missing Not at Random

Stratified modestly-weighted log-rank tests in settings with an anticipated delayed separation of survival curves

Design and Analysis of group-sequential clinical trials based on a modestly-weighted log-rank test in anticipation of a delayed separation of survival curves: A practical guidance

Quantifying treatment differences in confirmatory trials under non-proportional hazards

Association of differential censoring with survival and suboptimal control arms among oncology clinical trials

Adjusting for time-varying treatment switches in randomized clinical trials: the danger of extrapolation and how to avoid it

The impact of different censoring methods for analyzing survival using real-world data with linked mortality information: a simulation study

Combining Recurrent and Terminal Events Into a Composite Endpoint May Be Problematic

Covariate-adjusted Group Sequential Comparisons of Survival Probabilities