Abstract:Clinical Trials, Ahead of Print. Background:A common intercurrent event affecting many trials is when some participants do not begin their assigned treatment. For example, in a double-blind drug trial, some participants may not receive any dose of study medication. Many trials use a 'modified intention-to-treat' approach, whereby participants who do not initiate treatment are excluded from the analysis. However, it is not clear (a) the estimand being targeted by such an approach and (b) the assumptions necessary for such an approach to be unbiased.Methods:Using potential outcome notation, we demonstrate that a modified intention-to-treat analysis which excludes participants who do not begin treatment is estimating a principal stratum estimand (i.e. the treatment effect in the subpopulation of participants who would begin treatment, regardless of which arm they were assigned to). The modified intention-to-treat estimator is unbiased for the principal stratum estimand under the assumption that the intercurrent event is not affected by the assigned treatment arm, that is, participants who initiate treatment in one arm would also do so in the other arm (i.e. if someone began the intervention, they would also have begun the control, and vice versa).Results:We identify two key criteria in determining whether the modified intention-to-treat estimator is likely to be unbiased: first, we must be able to measure the participants in each treatment arm who experience the intercurrent event, and second, the assumption that treatment allocation will not affect whether the participant begins treatment must be reasonable. Most double-blind trials will satisfy these criteria, as the decision to start treatment cannot be influenced by the allocation, and we provide an example of an open-label trial where these criteria are likely to be satisfied as well, implying that a modified intention-to-treat analysis which excludes participants who do not begin treatment is an unbiased estimator for the principal stratum effect in these settings. We also give two examples where these criteria will not be satisfied (one comparing an active intervention vs usual care, where we cannot identify which usual care participants would have initiated the active intervention, and another comparing two active interventions in an unblinded manner, where knowledge of the assigned treatment arm may affect the participant's choice to begin or not), implying that a modified intention-to-treat estimator will be biased in these settings.Conclusion:A modified intention-to-treat analysis which excludes participants who do not begin treatment can be an unbiased estimator for the principal stratum estimand. Our framework can help identify when the assumptions for unbiasedness are likely to hold, and thus whether modified intention-to-treat is appropriate or not.

Estimation of treatment effect among treatment responders with a time‐to‐event endpoint

Estimating the treatment effect in a subgroup defined by an early post-baseline biomarker measurement in randomized clinical trials with time-to-event endpoint

On the estimation of average treatment effects with right-censored time to event outcome and competing risks

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

Mediation analysis of time‐to‐event endpoints accounting for repeatedly measured mediators subject to time‐varying confounding

Identification and estimation of treatment effects on long-term outcomes in clinical trials with external observational data

Evaluating causal effects on time-to-event outcomes in an RCT in Oncology with treatment discontinuation due to adverse events

Time‐to‐event estimands and loss to follow‐up in oncology in light of the estimands guidance

Targeted Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effect in Observational Survival Analysis

Translating questions to estimands in randomized clinical trials with intercurrent events

A novel estimand to adjust for rescue treatment in clinical trials

Identifying treatment response subgroups in observational time-to-event data

Conditional and Unconditional Treatment Effects in Randomized Clinical Trials: Estimands, Estimation, and Interpretation

Treatment Effect Quantification for Time-to-event Endpoints -- Estimands, Analysis Strategies, and beyond

Identifying Principal Stratum Causal Effects Conditional on a Post-treatment Intermediate Response

Using modified intention-to-treat as a principal stratum estimator for failure to initiate treatment

Estimation methods for estimands using the treatment policy strategy; a simulation study based on the PIONEER 1 Trial

Doubly Robust Targeted Estimation of Conditional Average Treatment Effects for Time-to-event Outcomes with Competing Risks

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

Estimation and Validation of Ratio-based Conditional Average Treatment Effects Using Observational Data

Inference for Cumulative Incidences and Treatment Effects in Randomized Controlled Trials with Time-to-Event Outcomes under ICH E9 (R1)