Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32577668›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2020

Improving Precision and Power in Randomized Trials for COVID-19 Treatments Using Covariate Adjustment, for Binary, Ordinal, and Time-to-Event Outcomes.

David Benkeser, Iván Díaz, Alex Luedtke, Jodi Segal, Daniel Scharfstein, Michael Rosenblum

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David BenkeserDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Emory University.
Iván DíazDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medicine.
Alex LuedtkeDepartment of Statistics, University of Washington, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.
Jodi SegalDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University.
Daniel ScharfsteinDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University.
Michael RosenblumDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University.

Funding

Johns Hopkins Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (JH-CERSI)U01FD005942 · FDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ALEXANDER, G. CALEB · 2016 to 2025
$15.5M
High-Resolution Inference for Correlates of Vaccine ProtectionDP2LM013340 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI LUEDTKE, ALEX · 2019 to 2019
$2.3M
FDA HHS U01 FD005942NLM NIH HHS DP2 LM013340
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Time is of the essence in evaluating potential drugs and biologics for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. There are currently over 400 clinical trials (phase 2 and 3) of treatments for COVID-19 registered on clinicaltrials.gov. Covariate adjustment is a statistical analysis method with potential to improve precision and reduce the required sample size for a substantial number of these trials. Though covariate adjustment is recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, it is underutilized, especially for the types of outcomes (binary, ordinal and time-to-event) that are common in COVID-19 trials. To demonstrate the potential value added by covariate adjustment in this context, we simulated two-arm, randomized trials comparing a hypothetical COVID-19 treatment versus standard of care, where the primary outcome is binary, ordinal, or time-to-event. Our simulated distributions are derived from two sources: longitudinal data on over 500 patients hospitalized at Weill Cornell Medicine New York Presbyterian Hospital, and a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) preliminary description of 2449 cases. We found substantial precision gains from using covariate adjustment--equivalent to 9-21% reductions in the required sample size to achieve a desired power--for a variety of estimands (targets of inference) when the trial sample size was at least 200. We provide an R package and practical recommendations for implementing covariate adjustment. The estimators that we consider are robust to model misspecification.

Identifiers

PMID32577668
PMCPMC7302221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.