ReviewJCO precision oncology2023
Validation of Predictive Analyses for Interim Decisions in Clinical Trials.
Review in JCO precision oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harmonized Estimation of Subgroup-Specific Treatment Effects in Randomized Trials: The Use of External Control Data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, Statistical methodology · 2026Article
- Risk stratification in gastric cancer lung metastasis: Utilizing an overall survival nomogram and comparing it with previous staging.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Data sources and applied methods for paclitaxel safety signal discernment.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Simulation-Based Bayesian Predictive Probability of Success for Interim Monitoring of Clinical Trials With Competing Event Data: Two Case Studies.Pharmaceutical statisticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAdaptive clinical trials use algorithms to predict, during the study, patient outcomes and final study results. These predictions trigger interim decisions, such as early discontinuation of the trial, and can change the course of the study. Poor selection of the Prediction Analyses and Interim Decisions (PAID) plan in an adaptive clinical trial can have negative consequences, including the risk of exposing patients to ineffective or toxic treatments.
methodsWe present an approach that leverages data sets from completed trials to evaluate and compare candidate PAIDs using interpretable validation metrics. The goal is to determine whether and how to incorporate predictions into major interim decisions in a clinical trial. Candidate PAIDs can differ in several aspects, such as the prediction models used, timing of interim analyses, and potential use of external data sets. To illustrate our approach, we considered a randomized clinical trial in glioblastoma. The study design includes interim futility analyses on the basis of the predictive probability that the final analysis, at the completion of the study, will provide significant evidence of treatment effects. We examined various PAIDs with different levels of complexity to investigate if the use of biomarkers, external data, or novel algorithms improved interim decisions in the glioblastoma clinical trial.
resultsValidation analyses on the basis of completed trials and electronic health records support the selection of algorithms, predictive models, and other aspects of PAIDs for use in adaptive clinical trials. By contrast, PAID evaluations on the basis of arbitrarily defined ad hoc simulation scenarios, which are not tailored to previous clinical data and experience, tend to overvalue complex prediction procedures and produce poor estimates of trial operating characteristics such as power and the number of enrolled patients.
conclusionValidation analyses on the basis of completed trials and real world data support the selection of predictive models, interim analysis rules, and other aspects of PAIDs in future clinical trials.
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.