Incorporating natural variation into IVF clinic league tables: The Expected Rank

Background. Rankings based on outcome are often used to present health care provider performance. These rankings do however not reflect that part of the variation in outcome between providers is caused by natural variation, and not by any differences in quality of care. The aim of this study is to compare standard methods for ranking with a novel method that takes into account natural variation. Methods. We used data on the number of treatment cycles and the number of pregnancies of 13 Dutch IVF clinics from 2004. We calculated the Expected Rank (ER), an estimate of the true rank of a provider, accounting for natural variation. We rescaled the ER to obtain the Percentile based on ER (PCER), that can be interpreted as the probability that a clinic is worse than a randomly selected other clinic. We also calculated a measure for rankability ρ, which is the part of variation between providers that is due to true differences (as opposed to natural variation). Results. The expected ranks ranged from 1.4 to 11.9 instead of the original ranks 1-13. The ER showed that some clinics performed very similar, which would be disregarded when using standard ranks. The PCER ranged from 7% to 88%. Rankability was substantial (ρ = 0.9). Conclusion. The Expected Rank provides a way to combine the attractiveness of a ranking, a single number and easy interpretation, with reliable analyses that does justice to the providers, and also allows individual comparisons

Effect of disease related biases on the subjective assessment of social functioning in Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia patients

Background: Questionnaires are the current hallmark for quantifying social functioning in human clinical research. In this study, we compared self- and proxy-rated (caregiver and researcher) assessments of social functioning in Schizophrenia (SZ) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients and evaluated if the discrepancy between the two assessments is mediated by disease-related factors such as symptom severity. Methods: We selected five items from the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) to assess social functioning in 53 AD and 61 SZ patients. Caregiver- and researcher-rated assessments of social functioning were used to calculate the discrepancies between self-rated and proxy-rated assessments. Furthermore, we used the number of communication events via smartphones to compare the questionnaire outcomes with an objective measure of social behaviour. Results: WHODAS results revealed that both AD (p < 0.001) and SZ (p < 0.004) patients significantly overestimate their social functioning relative to the assessment of their caregivers and/or researchers. This overestimation is mediated by the severity of cognitive impairments (MMSE; p = 0.019) in AD, and negative symptoms (PANSS; p = 0.028) in SZ. Subsequently, we showed that the proxy scores correlated more strongly with the smartphone communication events of the patient when compared to the patient-rated questionnaire scores (self; p = 0.076, caregiver; p < 0.001, researcher-rated; p = 0.046). Conclusion: Here we show that the observed overestimation of WHODAS social functioning scores in AD and SZ patients is partly driven by disease-related biases such as cognitive impairments and negative symptoms, respectively. Therefore, we postulate the development and implementation of objective measures of social functioning that may be less susceptible to such biases.The PRISM project (www.prism-project.eu) leading to this application has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No 115916. This Joint Undertaking receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA. This publication reflects only the authors’ views neither IMI JU nor EFPIA nor the European Commission are liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. Dr. Arango has also received funding support by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation. Instituto de Salud Carlos III (SAM16PE07CP1, PI16/02012, PI19/024), co-financed by ERDF Funds from the European Commission, “A way of making Europe”, CIBERSAM. Madrid Regional Government (B2017/BMD-3740 AGES-CM-2), European Union Structural Funds. Fundación Familia Alonso and Fundación Alicia Koplowit

The OPTIMIST study: optimisation of cost effectiveness through individualised FSH stimulation dosages for IVF treatment. A randomised controlled trial

Contains fulltext : 109739.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Costs of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) are high, which is partly due to the use of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). FSH is usually administered in a standard dose. However, due to differences in ovarian reserve between women, ovarian response also differs with potential negative consequences on pregnancy rates. A Markov decision-analytic model showed that FSH dose individualisation according to ovarian reserve is likely to be cost-effective in women who are eligible for IVF. However, this has never been confirmed in a large randomised controlled trial (RCT). The aim of the present study is to assess whether an individualised FSH dose regime based on an ovarian reserve test (ORT) is more cost-effective than a standard dose regime. METHODS/DESIGN: Multicentre RCT in subfertile women indicated for a first IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle, who are aged < 44 years, have a regular menstrual cycle and no major abnormalities at transvaginal sonography. Women with polycystic ovary syndrome, endocrine or metabolic abnormalities and women undergoing IVF with oocyte donation, will not be included. Ovarian reserve will be assessed by measuring the antral follicle count. Women with a predicted poor response or hyperresponse will be randomised for a standard versus an individualised FSH regime (150 IU/day, 225-450 IU/day and 100 IU/day, respectively). Participants will undergo a maximum of three stimulation cycles during maximally 18 months. The primary study outcome is the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate resulting in live birth achieved within 18 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes are parameters for ovarian response, multiple pregnancies, number of cycles needed per live birth, total IU of FSH per stimulation cycle, and costs. All data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed to assess whether the health and associated economic benefits of individualised treatment of subfertile women outweigh the additional costs of an ORT. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will be integrated into a decision model that compares cost-effectiveness of the three dose-adjustment strategies to a standard dose strategy. The study outcomes will provide scientific foundation for national and international guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2657

Developing excellence in biostatistics leadership, training and science in Africa: How the Sub-Saharan Africa Consortium for Advanced Biostatistics (SSACAB) training unites expertise to deliver excellence

The increase in health research in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has generated large amounts of data and led to a high demand for biostatisticians to analyse these data locally and quickly.  Donor-funded initiatives exist to address the dearth in statistical capacity, but few initiatives have been led by African institutions. The Sub-Saharan African Consortium for Advanced Biostatistics (SSACAB) aims to improve biostatistical capacity in Africa according to the needs identified by African institutions, through (collaborative) masters and doctoral training in biostatistics. We describe the SSACAB Consortium, which comprises 11 universities and four research institutions- supported by four European universities. SSACAB builds on existing resources to strengthen biostatistics for health research with a focus on supporting biostatisticians to become research leaders; building a critical mass of biostatisticians, and networking institutions and biostatisticians across SSA.  In 2015 only four institutions had established Masters programmes in biostatistics and SSACAB supported the remaining institutions to develop Masters programmes. In 2019 the University of the Witwatersrand became the first African institution to gain Royal Statistical Society accreditation for a Biostatistics MSc programme. A total of 150 fellows have been awarded scholarships to date of which 123 are Masters fellowships (41 female) of which with 58 have already graduated. Graduates have been employed in African academic (19) and research (15) institutions and 10 have enrolled for PhD studies. A total of 27 (10 female) PhD fellowships have been awarded; 4 of them are due to graduate by 2020. To date, SSACAB Masters and PhD students have published 17 and 31 peer-reviewed articles, respectively. SSACAB has also facilitated well-attended conferences, face-to-face and online short courses. Pooling the limited biostatistics resources in SSA, and combining with co-funding from external partners is an effective strategy for the development and teaching of advanced biostatistics methods, supervision and mentoring of PhD candidates

An Application of Sequential Meta-Analysis to Gene Expression Studies

Most of the discoveries from gene expression data are driven by a study claiming an optimal subset of genes that play a key role in a specific disease. Meta-analysis of the available datasets can help in getting concordant results so that a real-life application may be more successful. Sequential meta-analysis (SMA) is an approach for combining studies in chronological order while preserving the type I error and pre-specifying the statistical power to detect a given effect size. We focus on the application of SMA to find gene expression signatures across experiments in acute myeloid leukemia. SMA of seven raw datasets is used to evaluate whether the accumulated samples show enough evidence or more experiments should be initiated. We found 313 differentially expressed genes, based on the cumulative information of the experiments. SMA offers an alternative to existing methods in generating a gene list by evaluating the adequacy of the cumulative information

Comparing methods to combine functional loss and mortality in clinical trials for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Objective: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) clinical trials based on single end points only partially capture the full treatment effect when both function and mortality are affected, and may falsely dismiss efficacious drugs as futile. We aimed to investigate the statistical properties of several strategies for the simultaneous analysis of function and mortality in ALS clinical trials. Methods: Based on the Pooled Resource Open-Access ALS Clinical Trials (PRO-ACT) database, we simulated longitudinal patterns of functional decline, defined by the revised amyotrophic lateral sclerosis functional rating scale (ALSFRS-R) and conditional survival time. Different treatment scenarios with varying effect sizes were simulated with follow-up ranging from 12 to 18 months. We considered the following analytical strategies: 1) Cox model; 2) linear mixed effects (LME) model; 3) omnibus test based on Cox and LME models; 4) composite time-to-6-point decrease or death; 5) combined assessment of function and survival (CAFS); and 6) test based on joint modeling framework. For each analytical strategy, we calculated the empirical power and sample size. Results: Both Cox and LME models have increased false-negative rates when treatment exclusively affects either function or survival. The joint model has superior power compared to other strategies. The composite end point increases false-negative rates among all treatment scenarios. To detect a 15% reduction in ALSFRS-R decline and 34% decline in hazard with 80% power after 18 months, the Cox model requires 524 patients, the LME model 794 patients, the omnibus test 526 patients, the composite end point 1,274 patients, the CAFS 576 patients and the joint model 464 patients. Conclusion: Joint models have superior statistical power to analyze simultaneous effects on survival and function and may circumvent pitfalls encountered by other end points. Optimizing trial end points is essential, as selecting suboptimal outcomes may disguise important treatment clues

Comparison of statistical methods for the analysis of recurrent adverse events in the presence of non-proportional hazards and unobserved heterogeneity: a simulation study

Background: In preventive drug trials such as intermittent preventive treatment for malaria prevention during pregnancy (IPTp), where there is repeated treatment administration, recurrence of adverse events (AEs) is expected. Challenges in modelling the risk of the AEs include accounting for time-to-AE and within-patient-correlation, beyond the conventional methods. The correlation comes from two sources; (a) individual patient unobserved heterogeneity (i.e. frailty) and (b) the dependence between AEs characterised by time-dependent treatment effects. Potential AE-dependence can be modelled via time-dependent treatment effects, event-specific baseline and event-specific random effect, while heterogeneity can be modelled via subject-specific random effect. Methods that can improve the estimation of both the unobserved heterogeneity and treatment effects can be useful in understanding the evolution of risk of AEs, especially in preventive trials where time-dependent treatment effect is expected. Methods: Using both a simulation study and the Chloroquine for Malaria in Pregnancy (NCT01443130) trial data to demonstrate the application of the models, we investigated whether the lognormal shared frailty models with restricted cubic splines and non-proportional hazards (LSF-NPH) assumption can improve estimates for both frailty variance and treatment effect compared to the conventional inverse Gaussian shared frailty model with proportional hazard (ISF-PH), in the presence of time-dependent treatment effects and unobserved patient heterogeneity. We assessed the bias, precision gain and coverage probability of 95% confidence interval of the frailty variance estimates for the models under varying known unobserved heterogeneity, sample sizes and time-dependent effects. Results: The ISF-PH model provided a better coverage probability of 95% confidence interval, less bias and less precise frailty variance estimates compared to the LSF-NPH models. The LSF-NPH models yielded unbiased hazard ratio estimates at the expense of imprecision and high mean square error compared to the ISF-PH model. Conclusion: The choice of the shared frailty model for the recurrent AEs analysis should be driven by the study objective. Using the LSF-NPH models is appropriate if unbiased hazard ratio estimation is of primary interest in the presence of time-dependent treatment effects. However, ISF-PH model is appropriate if unbiased frailty variance estimation is of primary interest. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT0144313

Early initiation of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist treatment results in a more stable endocrine milieu during the mid- and late-follicular phases: a randomized controlled trial comparing gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist initiation on cycle day 2 or 6

Objective: to compare the effect of initiating GnRH antagonist (GnRH-a) on cycle day (CD) 2 vs. CD 6 on LH, E2, and P levels in the mid and late follicular phases.Design: nested study within a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Setting: reproductive medicine center in an university hospital.Patient(s): one hundred sixty patients undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).Intervention(s): recombinant FSH (150–225 IU) was administered daily from CD 2 onward. The study group (CD 2) started GnRH-a cotreatment on CD 2, whereas the control group (CD 6) started on CD 6.Main Outcome Measure(s): the follicular phase endocrine profile.Result(s): the LH levels on CD 6 were lower in the CD 2 group (0.6 ± 0.4 vs. 1.9 ± 1.4 IU/L). The CD 2 group demonstrated both lower E2 levels on CD 6 (520.1 ± 429.6 pmol/L vs. 1,071.7 ± 654.2 pmol/L) and on the day of hCG administration (3,341.4 ± 1,535.3 pmol/L vs. 4,573.2 ± 2,445.4 pmol/L). The P levels did not differ on CD 6 or on the day of hCG administration.Conclusion(s): early initiation of GnRH-a cotreatment results in a more stable endocrine profile, with more physiological levels of E2 and LH during the follicular phase. The effect on clinical outcomes must be established in larger trial

Sample size considerations and predictive performance of multinomial logistic prediction models

Multinomial Logistic Regression (MLR) has been advocated for developing clinical prediction models that distinguish between three or more unordered outcomes. We present a full-factorial simulation study to examine the predictive performance of MLR models in relation to the relative size of outcome categories, number of predictors and the number of events per variable. It is shown that MLR estimated by Maximum Likelihood yields overfitted prediction models in small to medium sized data. In most cases, the calibration and overall predictive performance of the multinomial prediction model is improved by using penalized MLR. Our simulation study also highlights the importance of events per variable in the multinomial context as well as the total sample size. As expected, our study demonstrates the need for optimism correction of the predictive performance measures when developing the multinomial logistic prediction model. We recommend the use of penalized MLR when prediction models are developed in small data sets or in medium sized data sets with a small total sample size (ie, when the sizes of the outcome categories are balanced). Finally, we present a case study in which we illustrate the development and validation of penalized and unpenalized multinomial prediction models for predicting malignancy of ovarian cancer.status: publishe

Sample size for binary logistic prediction models: Beyond events per variable criteria

Binary logistic regression is one of the most frequently applied statistical approaches for developing clinical prediction models. Developers of such models often rely on an Events Per Variable criterion (EPV), notably EPV ≥10, to determine the minimal sample size required and the maximum number of candidate predictors that can be examined. We present an extensive simulation study in which we studied the influence of EPV, events fraction, number of candidate predictors, the correlations and distributions of candidate predictor variables, area under the ROC curve, and predictor effects on out-of-sample predictive performance of prediction models. The out-of-sample performance (calibration, discrimination and probability prediction error) of developed prediction models was studied before and after regression shrinkage and variable selection. The results indicate that EPV does not have a strong relation with metrics of predictive performance, and is not an appropriate criterion for (binary) prediction model development studies. We show that out-of-sample predictive performance can better be approximated by considering the number of predictors, the total sample size and the events fraction. We propose that the development of new sample size criteria for prediction models should be based on these three parameters, and provide suggestions for improving sample size determination