ArticleBMC medical research methodology2025
Improving the efficiency of drug resistant tuberculosis treatment trials: a time-to-event alternative marker for bacteriological response and adaptive minimization for randomization.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEstablishing the efficacy of new treatments for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) is challenging due to the long-term clinical endpoints of two-year relapse-free survival. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an alternative indicator of treatment response on sample size requirements and the use of a minimization strategy for randomization.
methodsSample size estimates were compared when based on the commonly used endpoint of the proportion of patients achieving stable culture conversion (SCC) at 12 weeks versus a novel but corresponding indicator of treatment response based on a model of changes in mycobacterial load (MBL) over time. The non-linear mixed effects model, calibrated using data from a RR-TB cohort in the same setting, included a longitudinal MBL decline, a probabilistic component for mycobacteria presence in sputum, and a time-to-event model for culture positivity. Data were simulated for a prespecified treatment effect to compare the power of detecting the treatment effect for various sample sizes when using the commonly used endpoint and alternative indicator of treatment response. Additionally, the impact of random patient allocation versus a minimization strategy for randomization on covariate imbalance was assessed.
resultsTo achieve 80% power, 410 individuals were needed using the commonly used endpoint versus 110 participants when using the non-linear mixed effects model, corresponding to a 73% reduction in sample size. A small sample size results in high baseline covariate imbalance with random treatment group allocation, with a median relative imbalance of 0.104 for 110 participants versus 0.053 for 410 participants. This imbalance was reduced to 0.036 for 110 participants when an adaptive minimization procedure was implemented.
conclusionUsing a model of mycobacterial burden changes over time as an alternative indicator of treatment response, combined with a minimization procedure during the randomization process, significantly reduced the sample size which could, if validated, enhance the efficiency of RR-TB clinical trial design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.