Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37185413›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2023

Borrowing Concurrent Information from Non-Concurrent Control to Enhance Statistical Efficiency in Platform Trials.

Jialing Liu, Chengxing Lu, Ziren Jiang, Demissie Alemayehu, Lei Nie, Haitao Chu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Jialing LiuDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MI 55455, USA.
Chengxing LuOncology Biometrics, AstraZeneca, Waltham, MA 02451, USA.
Ziren JiangDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MI 55455, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5830-327X
Demissie AlemayehuStatistical Research and Data Science Center, Global Biometrics and Data Management, Pfizer Inc., New York, NY 10017, USA.
Lei NieDivision of Biometric IV, Office of Biostatistics, OTS/CDER, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Haitao ChuDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MI 55455, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0932-598X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A platform trial is a trial involving an innovative adaptive design with a single master protocol to efficiently evaluate multiple interventions. It offers flexible features such as dropping interventions for futility and adding new interventions to be evaluated during the course of a trial. Although there is a consensus that platform trials can identify beneficial interventions with fewer patients, less time, and a higher probability of success than traditional trials, there remains debate on certain issues, one of which is whether (and how) the non-concurrent control (NCC) (i.e., patients in the control group recruited prior to the new interventions) can be combined with the current control (CC) in the analysis, especially if there is a change of standard of care during the trial.

methodsIn this paper, considering time-to-event endpoints under the proportional hazard model assumption, we introduce a new concept of NCC concurrent observation time (NCC COT), and propose to borrow NCC COT through left truncation. This assumes that the NCC COT and CC are comparable. If the protocol does not prohibit NCC patients to change the standard of care while on study, NCC COT and CC likely will share the same standard of care. A simulated example is provided to demonstrate the approach.

resultsUsing exponential distributions, the simulated example assumes that NCC COT and CC have the same hazard, and the treatment group has a lower hazard. The estimated HR comparing treatment to the pooled control group is 0.744 (95% CI 0.575, 0.962), whereas the comparison to the CC group alone is 0.755 (95% CI 0.566, 1.008), with corresponding

conclusionThis article proposes an innovative approach of borrowing NCC COT to enhance statistical inference in platform trials under appropriate scenarios.

Indexed as

Adaptive Clinical Trials as TopicResearch DesignHumansleft truncationmaster protocolnon-concurrent controlplatform trialsright censoringsurvival data analysis

Identifiers

PMID37185413
PMCPMC10137133

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.