Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36150142›Full record

ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2023

Adaptive clinical trial designs with blinded selection of binary composite endpoints and sample size reassessment.

Marta Bofill Roig, Guadalupe Gómez Melis, Martin Posch, Franz Koenig

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marta Bofill RoigSection for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Wien, Austria.
Guadalupe Gómez MelisDepartament d'Estadística i Investigació Operativa, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTECH, Jordi Girona 1-3, 08034 Barcelona, Spain.
Martin PoschSection for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Wien, Austria.
Franz KoenigSection for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Wien, Austria.
Medical University of Vienna · ATStatistics Austria · ATUniversitat Politècnica de Catalunya · ES

Funding

Departament d'Empresa i Coneixement de la Generalitat de Catalunya under 2017 SGR 622
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For randomized clinical trials where a single, primary, binary endpoint would require unfeasibly large sample sizes, composite endpoints (CEs) are widely chosen as the primary endpoint. Despite being commonly used, CEs entail challenges in designing and interpreting results. Given that the components may be of different relevance and have different effect sizes, the choice of components must be made carefully. Especially, sample size calculations for composite binary endpoints depend not only on the anticipated effect sizes and event probabilities of the composite components but also on the correlation between them. However, information on the correlation between endpoints is usually not reported in the literature which can be an obstacle for designing future sound trials. We consider two-arm randomized controlled trials with a primary composite binary endpoint and an endpoint that consists only of the clinically more important component of the CE. We propose a trial design that allows an adaptive modification of the primary endpoint based on blinded information obtained at an interim analysis. Especially, we consider a decision rule to select between a CE and its most relevant component as primary endpoint. The decision rule chooses the endpoint with the lower estimated required sample size. Additionally, the sample size is reassessed using the estimated event probabilities and correlation, and the expected effect sizes of the composite components. We investigate the statistical power and significance level under the proposed design through simulations. We show that the adaptive design is equally or more powerful than designs without adaptive modification on the primary endpoint. Besides, the targeted power is achieved even if the correlation is misspecified at the planning stage while maintaining the type 1 error. All the computations are implemented in R and illustrated by means of a peritoneal dialysis trial.

Indexed as

Research DesignAdaptive Clinical Trials as TopicClinical Trials as TopicEndpoint DeterminationHumansSample SizeAdaptive designClinical trialComposite endpointInterim analysisSample size

Identifiers

PMID36150142
PMCPMC10939415
OpenAlexW4283323082

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.