Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35398251›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials2022

Handling death as an intercurrent event in time to recovery analysis in COVID-19 treatment clinical trials.

Hong Li, Kevin J Gleason, Yiran Hu, Sandra S Lovell, Saurabh Mukhopadhyay, Li Wang, Bidan Huang

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hong LiData and Statistical Sciences, AbbVie, North Chicago, USA. Electronic address: lena.lee.76@gmail.com.
Kevin J GleasonData and Statistical Sciences, AbbVie, North Chicago, USA.
Yiran HuData and Statistical Sciences, AbbVie, North Chicago, USA.
Sandra S LovellData and Statistical Sciences, AbbVie, North Chicago, USA.
Saurabh MukhopadhyayData and Statistical Sciences, AbbVie, North Chicago, USA.
Li WangData and Statistical Sciences, AbbVie, North Chicago, USA.
Bidan HuangData and Statistical Sciences, AbbVie, North Chicago, USA.
AbbVie (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In clinical trials with the objective to evaluate the treatment effect on time to recovery, such as investigational trials on therapies for COVID-19 hospitalized patients, the patients may face a mortality risk that competes with the opportunity to recover (e.g., be discharged from the hospital). Therefore, an appropriate analytical strategy to account for death is particularly important due to its potential impact on the estimation of the treatment effect. To address this challenge, we conducted a thorough evaluation and comparison of nine survival analysis methods with different strategies to account for death, including standard survival analysis methods with different censoring strategies and competing risk analysis methods. We report results of a comprehensive simulation study that employed design parameters commonly seen in COVID-19 trials and case studies using reconstructed data from a published COVID-19 clinical trial. Our research results demonstrate that, when there is a moderate to large proportion of patients who died before observing their recovery, competing risk analyses and survival analyses with the strategy to censor death at the maximum follow-up timepoint would be able to better detect a treatment effect on recovery than the standard survival analysis that treat death as a non-informative censoring event. The aim of this research is to raise awareness of the importance of handling death appropriately in the time-to-recovery analysis when planning current and future COVID-19 treatment trials.

Indexed as

COVID-19 Drug TreatmentDeathComputer SimulationHumansSurvival Analysiscompeting riskCOVID-19survival analysistime to event

Identifiers

PMID35398251
PMCPMC8986229
OpenAlexW4223486141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.