ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making2022
Approaches to Selecting "Time Zero" in External Control Arms with Multiple Potential Entry Points: A Simulation Study of 8 Approaches.
Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03105336 (A Phase 2 Multicenter Study of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
A Phase 2 Multicenter Study of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel in Subjects With Relapsed/Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (iNHL)
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Important tool in our rare disease toolbox: hybrid retrospective-prospective natural history studies serve well as external comparators for rare disease studies.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2024Review
- Application of the target trial emulation framework to external comparator studies.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2024Article
- Article
- Impact of "time zero" of Follow-Up Settings in a Comparative Effectiveness Study Using Real-World Data with a Non-user Comparator: Comparison of Six Different Settings.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2023Article
- External comparators and estimands.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhen including data from an external control arm to estimate comparative effectiveness, there is a methodological choice of when to set "time zero," the point at which a patient would be eligible/enrolled in a contemporary study. Where patients receive multiple lines of eligible therapy and thus alternative points could be selected, this issue is complex.
methodsA simulation study was conducted in which patients received multiple prior lines of therapy before entering either cohort. The results from the control and intervention data sets are compared using 8 methods for selecting time zero. The base-case comparison was set up to be biased against the intervention (which is generally received later), with methods compared in their ability to estimate the true intervention effectiveness. We further investigate the impact of key study attributes (such as sample size) and degree of overlap in time-varying covariates (such as prior lines of therapy) on study results.
resultsOf the 8 methods, 5 (all lines, random line, systematically selecting groups based on mean absolute error, root mean square error, or propensity scores) showed good performance in accounting for differences between the line at which patients were included. The first eligible line can be statistically inefficient in some situations. All lines (with censoring) cannot be used for survival outcomes. The last eligible line cannot be recommended.
conclusionsMultiple methods are available for selecting the most appropriate time zero from an external control arm. Based on the simulation, we demonstrate that some methods frequently perform poorly, with several viable methods remaining. In selecting between the viable methods, analysts should consider the context of their analysis and justify the approach selected. HIGHLIGHTS: There are multiple methods available from which an analyst may select "time zero" in an external control cohort.This simulation study demonstrates that some methods perform poorly but most are viable options, depending on context and the degree of overlap in time zero across cohorts.Careful thought and clear justification should be used when selecting the strategy for a study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.