Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40954036›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2025

Impact of Endpoint Delay on the Efficiency of Multi Arm Multi Stage Trials.

Aritra Mukherjee, James M S Wason

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. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Aritra MukherjeePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4531-6047
James M S WasonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR301614
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multi-arm multi-stage (MAMS) is an efficient class of trial designs that helps to assess multiple treatment strategies at the same time using an adaptive design. These designs can substantially reduce the average number of samples required compared to an equivalent single stage multi-arm trial. However, if patient recruitment is continued while we await treatment outcomes, a long-term primary outcome leads to a number of 'pipeline' patients getting recruited in the trial, who do not benefit from the early termination of a futile arm. This study focuses on quantifying the efficiency loss a MAMS design undergoes, in terms of the expected sample size (ESS), because of outcome delay. We first estimate the number of 'pipeline' patients (recruited during the interim analysis (IA) while awaiting outcome data) analytically through different recruitment models, given the total recruitment time. We then compute the ESS accounting for delay and assess the Efficiency Loss (EL). The results indicate that more than 50% of the expected efficiency gain is typically lost due to delay when the delay is more than

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicEndpoint DeterminationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignComputer SimulationHumansModels, StatisticalPatient SelectionSample SizeTime FactorsTreatment Outcomeadaptive designefficiencymulti‐arm multi‐stage (MAMS)outcome delay

Identifiers

PMID40954036
PMCPMC12436084

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.