Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37828533›Full record

ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2023

Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes are a powerful and patient-centric analysis of multi-domain scores.

Vaiva Deltuvaite-Thomas, Mickaël De Backer, Samantha Parker, Marie Deneux, Lynda E Polgreen, Cara O'Neill, Samuel Salvaggio, Marc Buyse

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Vaiva Deltuvaite-ThomasInternational Drug Development Institute, Avenue Provinciale 30, 1340, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. vaiva.thomas@iddi.com.ORCID 0000-0003-0889-3248
Mickaël De BackerInstitut de Statistique, Biostatistique et Sciences Actuarielles, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Samantha ParkerLysogene, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France.
Marie DeneuxLysogene, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France.
Lynda E PolgreenLundquist Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, USA.
Cara O'NeillCure Sanfilippo Foundation, Columbia, SC, USA.
Samuel SalvaggioInternational Drug Development Institute, Avenue Provinciale 30, 1340, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Marc BuyseInternational Drug Development Institute, Avenue Provinciale 30, 1340, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
International Drug Development Institute (Belgium) · BECytoskeleton (United States) · USUCLA Medical Center · USUCLouvain · BE

Funding

Gouvernement Wallon 7979
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGeneralized pairwise comparisons (GPC) can be used to assess the net benefit of new treatments for rare diseases. We show the potential of GPC through simulations based on data from a natural history study in mucopolysaccharidosis type IIIA (MPS IIIA).

methodsUsing data from a historical series of untreated children with MPS IIIA aged 2 to 9 years at the time of enrolment and followed for 2 years, we performed simulations to assess the operating characteristics of GPC to detect potential (simulated) treatment effects on a multi-domain symptom assessment. Two approaches were used for GPC: one in which the various domains were prioritized, the other with all domains weighted equally. The net benefit was used as a measure of treatment effect. We used increasing thresholds of clinical relevance to reflect the magnitude of the desired treatment effects, relative to the standard deviation of the measurements in each domain.

resultsGPC were shown to have adequate statistical power (80% or more), even with small sample sizes, to detect treatment effects considered to be clinically worthwhile on a symptom assessment covering five domains (expressive language, daily living skills, and gross-motor, sleep and pain). The prioritized approach generally led to higher power as compared with the non-prioritized approach.

conclusionsGPC of prioritized outcomes is a statistically powerful as well as a patient-centric approach for the analysis of multi-domain scores in MPS IIIA and could be applied to other heterogeneous rare diseases.

Indexed as

Mucopolysaccharidosis IIIChildData CollectionHumansPatient-Centered CareRare DiseasesGeneralized pairwise comparisonsMucopolysaccharidosis type IIIAMulti-domain analysisNet benefitO’Brien testPrioritized outcomesSanfilippo syndrome

Identifiers

PMID37828533
PMCPMC10571482
OpenAlexW4387579314

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.