Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32571311›Full record

ArticleRespiratory research2020

Improving the evaluation of COPD exacerbation treatment effects by accounting for early treatment discontinuations: a post-hoc analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Agnieszka Król, Robert Palmér, Virginie Rondeau, Stephen Rennard, Ulf G Eriksson, Alexandra Jauhiainen

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Respiratory research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Longitudinal FEVInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Agnieszka KrólClinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Robert PalmérClinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Virginie RondeauBiostatistics Team, INSERM CR1219, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Stephen RennardBioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK.
Ulf G ErikssonClinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Alexandra JauhiainenBioPharma Early Biometrics and Statistical Innovation, Data Science & AI, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Pepparedsleden 1, SE-431 83, Mölndal, Sweden. alexandra.jauhiainen@astrazeneca.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9714-7962
AstraZeneca (Sweden) · SEAstraZeneca (Australia) · AUAstraZeneca (United Kingdom) · GBUniversité de Bordeaux · FR

Funding

AstraZeneca Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) clinical trials aimed at evaluating treatment effects on exacerbations often suffer from early discontinuations of randomized treatment. Treatment discontinuations imply a loss of information and should ideally be considered in the statistical analysis of trial results, particularly if the discontinuations are related to the disease or treatment itself. Here, we explore this issue by investigating (1) whether there exists an association between the risks of exacerbation and treatment discontinuation in COPD clinical trials and (2) whether disregarding this association can cause bias in exacerbation treatment effect estimates. We focus on the hypothetical estimand, i.e. the treatment effect that would have been observed had all subjects completed the trial as planned.

methodsThe association between exacerbation and discontinuation risks was analysed by applying a joint frailty (random effect) model - allowing for the simultaneous analysis of multiple types of correlated events - to data from five Phase III-IV COPD clinical trials. Specifically, the impact of the association on exacerbation treatment effect estimates was assessed by comparing the treatment hazard ratios of the joint frailty model to the rate/hazard ratios of two related statistical models (the negative binomial and shared frailty models), which both assume discontinuations to be unrelated to the trial outcome. The models were also compared using simulated data.

resultsA statistically significant (p < 0.0001), positive association between exacerbation and discontinuation risks was found in all trials. Importantly, simulations confirmed that - with such an association - models disregarding the association risk producing biased results (> 5 percentage point difference in hazard/rate ratio). For some treatment comparisons in the clinical trials, the difference in treatment effect estimates between the joint frailty and the other models was as high as 10-15 percentage points. The difference was affected by the strength of the exacerbation-discontinuation association, the population heterogeneity in exacerbation risk, and the difference in discontinuation rates between treatment arms.

conclusionsWe have identified an association between the risks of exacerbation and treatment discontinuation in five COPD clinical trials. We recommend using the joint frailty model to account for this association when estimating exacerbation treatment effects, particularly when targeting the hypothetical estimand.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicClinical Trials, Phase IV as TopicDatabases, FactualFrailtyHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPhosphodiesterase 4 InhibitorsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsTime FactorsWithholding TreatmentPhosphodiesterase 4 InhibitorsCOPDDropoutsEarly treatment discontinuationsExacerbationsJoint frailty modelRecurrent eventsSurvival analysis

Identifiers

PMID32571311
PMCPMC7310001
OpenAlexW3036791823

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.