Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22102862›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2011

Sample size requirements for studies of treatment effects on beta-cell function in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes.

John M Lachin, Paula L McGee, Carla J Greenbaum, Jerry Palmer, Mark D Pescovitz, Peter Gottlieb, Jay Skyler, Type 1 Diabetes Trial Network

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Lack of effect ofBMJ open diabetes research & care · 2021
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Effects ofBMJ open · 2017
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

John M LachinThe Biostatistics Center, The George Washington University, Rockville, Maryland, United States of America. jml@bsc.gwu.edu
Paula L McGee
Carla J Greenbaum
Jerry Palmer
Mark D Pescovitz
Peter Gottlieb
Jay Skyler
Type 1 Diabetes Trial Network
George Washington University · USBenaroya Research InstituteIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USUniversity of Colorado Health · USUniversity of Miami · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Northwest Clinical Center for Type 1 Diabetes - TrialNetU01DK061034 · NIDDK · BENAROYA RESEARCH INST AT VIRGINIA MASON · PI GREENBAUM, CARLA J · 2001 to 2018
$10.3M
NIDDK NIH HHS U01 DK061034
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preservation of β-cell function as measured by stimulated C-peptide has recently been accepted as a therapeutic target for subjects with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. In recently completed studies conducted by the Type 1 Diabetes Trial Network (TrialNet), repeated 2-hour Mixed Meal Tolerance Tests (MMTT) were obtained for up to 24 months from 156 subjects with up to 3 months duration of type 1 diabetes at the time of study enrollment. These data provide the information needed to more accurately determine the sample size needed for future studies of the effects of new agents on the 2-hour area under the curve (AUC) of the C-peptide values. The natural log(x), log(x+1) and square-root (√x) transformations of the AUC were assessed. In general, a transformation of the data is needed to better satisfy the normality assumptions for commonly used statistical tests. Statistical analysis of the raw and transformed data are provided to estimate the mean levels over time and the residual variation in untreated subjects that allow sample size calculations for future studies at either 12 or 24 months of follow-up and among children 8-12 years of age, adolescents (13-17 years) and adults (18+ years). The sample size needed to detect a given relative (percentage) difference with treatment versus control is greater at 24 months than at 12 months of follow-up, and differs among age categories. Owing to greater residual variation among those 13-17 years of age, a larger sample size is required for this age group. Methods are also described for assessment of sample size for mixtures of subjects among the age categories. Statistical expressions are presented for the presentation of analyses of log(x+1) and √x transformed values in terms of the original units of measurement (pmol/ml). Analyses using different transformations are described for the TrialNet study of masked anti-CD20 (rituximab) versus masked placebo. These results provide the information needed to accurately evaluate the sample size for studies of new agents to preserve C-peptide levels in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAge FactorsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-DerivedArea Under CurveChildCohort StudiesC-PeptideDaclizumabDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Drug Therapy, CombinationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansImmunoglobulin GAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-DerivedC-PeptideDaclizumabImmunoglobulin GImmunologic FactorsImmunosuppressive AgentsMycophenolic AcidRituximab

Identifiers

PMID22102862
PMCPMC3213096
OpenAlexW1970451219

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.