Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41045149›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2025

Estimating treatment effects in trials with outcome data truncated by death: A case study on aligning estimators with estimands.

Tra My Pham, Brennan C Kahan, Andre Lopes, Memuna Rashid, Peter J Hoskin, Ian R White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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.

Tra My PhamMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0528-6303
Brennan C KahanMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9957-0844
Andre LopesCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, London, UK.
Memuna RashidCancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, London, UK.ORCID 0009-0004-0596-8560
Peter J HoskinMount Vernon Cancer Centre, Northwood, UK.
Ian R WhiteMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6718-7661

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/07Medical Research Council MR/Z503770/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsRandomised clinical trials assessing treatment effects on health outcomes (e.g. quality of life) can be affected by data truncation by death, where some patients die before their outcome measure is assessed and their data become undefined after death. The ICH E9(R1) addendum on estimands discusses four strategies for handling such terminal intercurrent events: hypothetical, composite, while-alive, and principal stratum. While the addendum emphasises the importance of aligning statistical methods of analysis (i.e. estimators) with estimands, it does not provide specific guidance and consideration on the choice of estimators in practice. We aim to (1) demonstrate how some statistical methods commonly used in trials can be used to estimate different intercurrent event strategies for handling data truncation by death; and (2) describe how missing outcome data (e.g. due to missed assessments or loss to follow-up) can be handled for each estimator.

methodWe use data from SCORAD, a non-inferiority randomised trial comparing single-fraction versus multifraction radiotherapy on ambulatory status at 8 weeks (primary outcome) among patients with spinal canal compression from metastatic cancer. Here, we estimate the effect of radiotherapy on quality of life (secondary outcome), quantified by the difference in mean global health status between the two groups at 8 weeks. We outline the strategies for handling death and describe a selection of commonly used estimators corresponding to each strategy. The handling of missing data is considered and demonstrated as part of the estimation process.

resultsThe hypothetical strategy, targeting a treatment effect assuming patients had not died, can be estimated using linear mixed models (a likelihood approach) or multiple imputation (a method commonly used for handling missing data). The composite and while-alive strategies relate to the 'outcome' attribute of the estimand; the former incorporates death into the definition of the primary outcome, the latter only uses outcome data before death. These can be estimated by re-defining the outcome, for example, assigning a value reflecting poor global health status post-death, or using the last global health status observed before death. The principal stratum strategy, targeting a treatment effect among patients who would not die under either treatment, can be estimated by an analysis of survivors under specific assumptions. Missing data can be handled with linear mixed models or multiple imputation.

conclusionsRegarding death as an intercurrent event in the process of defining the estimand for the trial will help clarify the choice of suitable estimators. When choosing the estimators, it is important to consider the assumptions required by the estimators as well as their plausibility given the setting of the trial.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansModels, StatisticalQuality of LifeResearch DesignTreatment OutcomeData truncation by deathestimandsestimationintercurrent eventsmissing dataRCTs

Identifiers

PMID41045149
PMCPMC12647389

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.