Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40095648›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2025

Identification and Estimation of Causal Effects Using Non-Concurrent Controls in Platform Trials.

Michele Santacatterina, Federico Macchiavelli Giron, Xinyi Zhang, Iván Díaz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Michele SantacatterinaDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0599-3876
Federico Macchiavelli GironDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Xinyi ZhangDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Iván DíazDivision of Biostatistics, Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.

Funding

SCH: A structural causal framework for adaptive experimentsR01AI197146 · NIAID · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Ivan Diaz, Michele Santacatterina · 2025 to 2026
$601k
National Science Foundation 2306556NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI197146
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Platform trials are multi-arm designs that simultaneously evaluate multiple treatments for a single disease within the same overall trial structure. Unlike traditional randomized controlled trials, they allow treatment arms to enter and exit the trial at distinct times while maintaining a control arm throughout. This control arm comprises both concurrent controls, where participants are randomized concurrently to either the treatment or control arm, and non-concurrent controls, who enter the trial when the treatment arm under study is unavailable. While flexible, platform trials introduce the challenge of using non-concurrent controls, raising questions about estimating treatment effects. Specifically, which estimands should be targeted? Under what assumptions can these estimands be identified and estimated? Are there any efficiency gains? In this article, we discuss issues related to the identification and estimation assumptions of common choices of estimand. We conclude that the most robust strategy to increase efficiency without imposing unwarranted assumptions is to target the concurrent average treatment effect (cATE), the ATE among only concurrent units, using a covariate-adjusted doubly robust estimator. Our studies suggest that, for the purpose of obtaining efficiency gains, collecting important prognostic variables is more important than relying on non-concurrent controls. We also discuss the perils of targeting ATE due to an untestable extrapolation assumption that will often be invalid. We provide simulations illustrating our points and an application to the ACTT platform trial, resulting in a 20% improvement in precision compared to the naive estimator that ignores non-concurrent controls and prognostic variables.

Indexed as

CausalityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdaptive Clinical Trials as TopicComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalResearch Designadaptive trialscausalitydoubly robustefficiencyestimand

Identifiers

PMID40095648
PMCPMC13202376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.