Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32628533›Full record

ArticleAnnals of internal medicine2020

Analysis of Response Data for Assessing Treatment Effects in Comparative Clinical Studies.

Bo Huang, Lu Tian, Zachary R McCaw, Xiaodong Luo, Enayet Talukder, Mace Rothenberg, Wanling Xie, Toni K Choueiri, Dae Hyun Kim, Lee-Jen Wei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of internal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

10 authors.

Bo HuangPfizer, Groton, Connecticut (B.H., E.T.).ORCID 0000-0002-3088-9328
Lu TianStanford University, Stanford, California (L.T.).
Zachary R McCawHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts (Z.R.M.).ORCID 0000-0002-2006-9828
Xiaodong LuoSanofi, Bridgewater, New Jersey (X.L.).ORCID 0000-0002-8214-9874
Enayet TalukderPfizer, Groton, Connecticut (B.H., E.T.).
Mace RothenbergPfizer, New York, New York (M.R.).
Wanling XieDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts (W.X., T.K.C.).
Toni K ChoueiriDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts (W.X., T.K.C.).ORCID 0000-0002-9201-3217
Dae Hyun KimHinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (D.H.K.).ORCID 0000-0001-7290-6838
Lee-Jen WeiHarvard University, Boston, Massachusetts (L.W.).

Funding

Statistical Methods for Optimizing Personalized Treatment SelectionR01HL089778 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI LU TIAN · 2008 to 2026
$4.8M
Restricted Mean Survival Time to Interpret Clinical Trials for Treatment Decision-Making in Older AdultsR21AG060227 · NIA · HEBREW REHABILITATION CENTER FOR AGED · PI KIM, DAE HYUN · 2019 to 2020
$449k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL089778NIA NIH HHS R21 AG060227
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In comparative studies, treatment effect is often assessed using a binary outcome that indicates response to the therapy. Commonly used summary measures for response include the cumulative and current response rates at a specific time point. The current response rate is sometimes called the probability of being in response (PBIR), which regards a patient as a responder only if they have achieved and remain in response at present. The methods used in practice for estimating these rates, however, may not be appropriate. Moreover, whereas an effective treatment is expected to achieve a rapid and sustained response, the response at a fixed time point does not provide information about the duration of response (DOR). As an alternative, a curve constructed from the current response rates over the entire study period may be considered, which can be used for visualizing how rapidly patients responded to therapy and how long responses were sustained. The area under the PBIR curve is the mean DOR. This connection between response and DOR makes this curve attractive for assessing the treatment effect. In contrast to the conventional method for analyzing the DOR data, which uses responders only, the above procedure includes all patients in the study. Although discussed extensively in the statistical literature, estimation of the current response rate curve has garnered little attention in the medical literature. This article illustrates how to construct and analyze such a curve using data from a recent study for treating renal cell carcinoma. Clinical trialists are encouraged to consider this robust and clinically interpretable procedure as an additional tool for evaluating treatment effects in clinical studies.

Indexed as

Comparative Effectiveness ResearchData Interpretation, StatisticalEquivalence Trials as TopicAntineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma, Renal CellHumansKidney NeoplasmsProbabilityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStatistics as TopicTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID32628533
PMCPMC7773521

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.