48 research outputs found
Adjusting for treatment switching in the METRIC study shows further improved overall survival with trametinib compared with chemotherapy
Trametinib, a selective inhibitor of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 1 (MEK1) and MEK2, significantly improves progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy in patients with BRAF V600E/K mutationâpositive advanced or metastatic melanoma (MM). However, the pivotal clinical trial permitted randomized chemotherapy control group patients to switch to trametinib after disease progression, which confounded estimates of the overall survival (OS) advantage of trametinib. Our purpose was to estimate the switching-adjusted treatment effect of trametinib for OS and assess the suitability of each adjustment method in the primary efficacy population. Of the patients randomized to chemotherapy, 67.4% switched to trametinib. We applied the rank-preserving structural failure time model, inverse probability of censoring weights, and a two-stage accelerated failure time model to obtain estimates of the relative treatment effect adjusted for switching. The intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis estimated a 28% reduction in the hazard of death with trametinib treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52â0.98) for patients in the primary efficacy population (data cut May 20, 2013). Adjustment analyses deemed plausible provided OS HR point estimates ranging from 0.48 to 0.53. Similar reductions in the HR were estimated for the first-line metastatic subgroup. Treatment with trametinib, compared with chemotherapy, significantly reduced the risk of death and risk of disease progression in patients with BRAF V600E/K mutationâpositive advanced melanoma or MM. Adjusting for switching resulted in lower HRs than those obtained from standard ITT analyses. However, CI are wide and results are sensitive to the assumptions associated with each adjustment method
Treatment Switching: statistical and decision making challenges and approaches
Objectives: Treatment switching refers to the situation in a randomised controlled trial where
patients switch from their randomly assigned treatment onto an alternative. Often, switching is from
the control group onto the experimental treatment. In this instance, a standard intention-to-treat
analysis does not identify the true comparative effectiveness of the treatments under investigation.
We aim to describe statistical methods for adjusting for treatment switching in a comprehensible
way for non-statisticians, and to summarise views on these methods expressed by stakeholders at
the 2014 Adelaide International Workshop on Treatment Switching in Clinical Trials.
Methods: We describe three statistical methods used to adjust for treatment switching: marginal
structural models, two-stage adjustment, and rank preserving structural failure time models. We
draw upon discussion heard at the Adelaide International Workshop to explore the views of
stakeholders on the acceptability of these methods.
Results: Stakeholders noted that adjustment methods are based on assumptions, the validity of
which may often be questionable. There was disagreement on the acceptability of adjustment
methods, but consensus that when these are used, they should be justified rigorously. The utility of
adjustment methods depends upon the decision being made and the processes used by the
decision-maker.
Conclusions: Treatment switching makes estimating the true comparative effect of a new treatment
challenging. However, many decision-makers have reservations with adjustment methods. These,
and how they affect the utility of adjustment methods, require further exploration. Further technical
work is required to develop adjustment methods to meet real world needs, to enhance their
acceptability to decision-makers
Treatment switching in cancer trials: Issues and proposals
Objectives: Treatment switching occurs when patients in a randomized clinical trial switch from the treatment initially assigned to them to another treatment, typically from the control to experimental treatment. This study discusses the issues this raises and possible approaches to addressing them in trials of cancer drugs. Methods: Stakeholders from around the world were invited to a 1.5-day Workshop in Adelaide, Australia. This study attempts to capture the key points from the discussion and the perspectives of the various stakeholder groups, but is not a formal consensus statement. Results: Treatment switching raises challenging ethical issues with arguments for and against allowing it. It is increasingly common in cancer drug trials and presents challenges for the interpretation of results by regulators, clinicians, patients, and payers. Proposals are offered for good practice in the design, management, and analysis of trials and wider development programs for cancer drugs in which treatment switching has occurred or is likely to. Recommendations are also offered for further action to improve understanding of the importance and challenges of treatment switching and to promote agreement between key stakeholders on guidelines and other steps to address these challenges. Conclusions: The handling of treatment switching in trials is of concern to all stakeholders. On the basis of the discussions at the Adelaide International Workshop, there would appear to be common ground on approaches to addressing treatment switching in cancer trials and scope for the development of formal guidelines to inform the work of regulators, payers, industry, trial designers and other stakeholders
Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in clinical trials: A follow-up simulation study
When patients randomised to the control group of a randomised controlled trial are allowed to switch onto the
experimental treatment, intention-to-treat analyses of the treatment effect are confounded because the separation of
randomised groups is lost. Previous research has investigated statistical methods that aim to estimate the treatment
effect that would have been observed had this treatment switching not occurred and has demonstrated their
performance in a limited set of scenarios. Here, we investigate these methods in a new range of realistic scenarios,
allowing conclusions to be made based upon a broader evidence base. We simulated randomised controlled
trials incorporating prognosis-related treatment switching and investigated the impact of sample size, reduced
switching proportions, disease severity, and alternative data-generating models on the performance of adjustment
methods, assessed through a comparison of bias, mean squared error, and coverage, related to the estimation of true
restricted mean survival in the absence of switching in the control group. Rank preserving structural failure time models,
inverse probability of censoring weights, and two-stage methods consistently produced less bias than the intentionto-treat
analysis. The switching proportion was confirmed to be a key determinant of bias: sample size and censoring
proportion were relatively less important. It is critical to determine the size of the treatment effect in terms of an
acceleration factor (rather than a hazard ratio) to provide information on the likely bias associated with rank-preserving
structural failure time model adjustments. In general, inverse probability of censoring weight methods are more volatile
than other adjustment methods
Modeling the multiâstate natural history of rare diseases with heterogeneous individual patient data : a simulation study
Multiâstate survival models are used to represent the natural history of a disease, forming the basis of a health technology assessment comparing a novel treatment to current practice. Constructing such models for rare diseases is problematic, since evidence sources are typically much sparser and more heterogeneous. This simulation study investigated different oneâstage and twoâstage approaches to metaâanalyzing individual patient data (IPD) in a multiâstate survival setting when the number and size of studies being metaâanalyzed are small. The objective was to assess methods of different complexity to see when they are accurate, when they are inaccurate and when they struggle to converge due to the sparsity of data. Biologically plausible multiâstate IPD were simulated from studyâ and transitionâspecific hazard functions. Oneâstage frailty and twoâstage stratified models were estimated, and compared to a base case model that did not account for study heterogeneity. Convergence and the bias/coverage of populationâlevel transition probabilities to, and lengths of stay in, each state were used to assess model performance. A realâworld application to Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, a neuromuscular rare disease, was conducted, and a software demonstration is provided. Models not accounting for study heterogeneity were consistently outâperformed by twoâstage models. Frailty models struggled to converge, particularly in scenarios of low heterogeneity, and predictions from models that did converge were also subject to bias. Stratified models may be better suited to metaâanalyzing disparate sources of IPD in rare disease natural history/economic modeling, as they converge more consistently and produce less biased predictions of lengths of stay
Clinical and cost effectiveness of computer treatment for aphasia post stroke (Big CACTUS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Background
Aphasia affects the ability to speak, comprehend spoken language, read and write. One third of stroke survivors experience aphasia. Evidence suggests that aphasia can continue to improve after the first few months with intensive speech and language therapy, which is frequently beyond what resources allow. The development of computer software for language practice provides an opportunity for self-managed therapy. This pragmatic randomised controlled trial will investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of a computerised approach to long-term aphasia therapy post stroke.
Methods/Design
A total of 285 adults with aphasia at least four months post stroke will be randomly allocated to either usual care, computerised intervention in addition to usual care or attention and activity control in addition to usual care. Those in the intervention group will receive six months of self-managed word finding practice on their home computer with monthly face-to-face support from a volunteer/assistant. Those in the attention control group will receive puzzle activities, supplemented by monthly telephone calls.
Study delivery will be coordinated by 20 speech and language therapy departments across the United Kingdom. Outcome measures will be made at baseline, six, nine and 12 months after randomisation by blinded speech and language therapist assessors. Primary outcomes are the change in number of words (of personal relevance) named correctly at six months and improvement in functional conversation. Primary outcomes will be analysed using a Hochberg testing procedure. Significance will be declared if differences in both word retrieval and functional conversation at six months are significant at the 5% level, or if either comparison is significant at 2.5%. A cost utility analysis will be undertaken from the NHS and personal social service perspective. Differences between costs and quality-adjusted life years in the three groups will be described and the incremental cost effectiveness ratio will be calculated. Treatment fidelity will be monitored.
Discussion
This is the first fully powered trial of the clinical and cost effectiveness of computerised aphasia therapy. Specific challenges in designing the protocol are considered.
Trial registration
Registered with Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN68798818 webcite on 18 February 2014
Evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of behavioural activation therapy for depression after stroke (BEADS): a feasibillity randomised controlled trial
Rituximab in Combination with Corticosteroids for the Treatment of Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis: A NICE Single Technology Appraisal
As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of rituximab (Roche Products) to submit evidence of the clinical and cost effectiveness of rituximab in combination with corticosteroids for treatment of anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV). The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology, based upon the manufacturerâs submission to NICE. The evidence was derived mainly from a double-blind, phase III, placebo-controlled trial of rituximab in patients with new or relapsed âsevereâ AAV, which compared a rituximab treatment regimen with an oral cyclophosphamide treatment regimen. Intravenous cyclophosphamide is also commonly used but was not included in the pivotal trial. The evidence showed that rituximab is noninferior to oral cyclophosphamide in terms of induction of remission in adults with AAV and de novo disease, and is superior to oral cyclophosphamide in terms of remission in adults who have relapsed once on cyclophosphamide. The ERG concluded that the results of the manufacturerâs economic evaluation could not be considered robust, because of errors and because the full range of relevant treatment sequences were not modelled. The ERG amended the manufacturerâs model and demonstrated that rituximab was likely to represent a cost-effective addition to the treatment sequence if given after cyclophosphamide treatment
Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in randomised controlled trials: a simulation study
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We investigate methods used to analyse the results of clinical trials with survival outcomes in which some patients switch from their allocated treatment to another trial treatment. These included simple methods which are commonly used in medical literature and may be subject to selection bias if patients switching are not typical of the population as a whole. Methods which attempt to adjust the estimated treatment effect, either through adjustment to the hazard ratio or via accelerated failure time models, were also considered. A simulation study was conducted to assess the performance of each method in a number of different scenarios.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>16 different scenarios were identified which differed by the proportion of patients switching, underlying prognosis of switchers and the size of true treatment effect. 1000 datasets were simulated for each of these and all methods applied. Selection bias was observed in simple methods when the difference in survival between switchers and non-switchers were large. A number of methods, particularly the AFT method of Branson and Whitehead were found to give less biased estimates of the true treatment effect in these situations.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Simple methods are often not appropriate to deal with treatment switching. Alternative approaches such as the Branson & Whitehead method to adjust for switching should be considered.</p
Motor control or graded activity exercises for chronic low back pain? A randomised controlled trial
Background: Chronic low back pain remains a major health problem in Australia and around the world. Unfortunately the majority of treatments for this condition produce small effects because not all patients respond to each treatment. It appears that only 25-50% of patients respond to exercise. The two most popular types of exercise for low back pain are graded activity and motor control exercises. At present however, there are no guidelines to help clinicians select the best treatment for a patient. As a result, time and money are wasted on treatments which ultimately fail to help the patient