-
A general Bayesian approach to design adaptive clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes
Authors:
James M. McGree,
Antony M. Overstall,
Mark Jones,
Robert K. Mahar
Abstract:
Clinical trials are an integral component of medical research. Trials require careful design to, for example, maintain the safety of participants, use resources efficiently and allow clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn. Adaptive clinical trials (i.e. trials that can be altered based on evidence that has accrued) are often more efficient, informative and ethical than standard or non-adapt…
▽ More
Clinical trials are an integral component of medical research. Trials require careful design to, for example, maintain the safety of participants, use resources efficiently and allow clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn. Adaptive clinical trials (i.e. trials that can be altered based on evidence that has accrued) are often more efficient, informative and ethical than standard or non-adaptive trials because they require fewer participants, target more promising treatments, and can stop early with sufficient evidence of effectiveness or harm. The design of adaptive trials requires the pre-specification of adaptions that are permissible throughout the conduct of the trial. Proposed adaptive designs are then usually evaluated through simulation which provides indicative metrics of performance (e.g. statistical power and type-1 error) under different scenarios. Trial simulation requires assumptions about the data generating process to be specified but correctly specifying these in practice can be difficult, particularly for new and emerging diseases. To address this, we propose an approach to design adaptive clinical trials without needing to specify the complete data generating process. To facilitate this, we consider a general Bayesian framework where inference about the treatment effect on a time-to-event outcome can be performed via the partial likelihood. As a consequence, the proposed approach to evaluate trial designs is robust to the specific form of the baseline hazard function. The benefits of this approach are demonstrated through the redesign of a recent clinical trial to evaluate whether a third dose of a vaccine provides improved protection against gastroenteritis in Australian Indigenous infants.
△ Less
Submitted 1 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
-
Statistical analyses of ordinal outcomes in randomised controlled trials: protocol for a scoping review
Authors:
Chris J. Selman,
Katherine J. Lee,
Robert K. Mahar
Abstract:
Randomised controlled trials aim to assess the impact of one (or more) health interventions relative to other standard interventions. RCTs sometimes use an ordinal outcome, which is an endpoint that comprises of multiple, monotonically ordered categories that are not necessarily separated by a quantifiable distance. Ordinal outcomes are appealing in clinical settings as disease states can represen…
▽ More
Randomised controlled trials aim to assess the impact of one (or more) health interventions relative to other standard interventions. RCTs sometimes use an ordinal outcome, which is an endpoint that comprises of multiple, monotonically ordered categories that are not necessarily separated by a quantifiable distance. Ordinal outcomes are appealing in clinical settings as disease states can represent meaningful categories that may be of clinical importance. They can also retain information and increase statistical power compared to dichotomised outcomes. Target parameters for ordinal outcomes in RCTs may vary depending on the nature of the research question, the modelling assumptions, and the expertise of the data analyst. The aim of this scoping review is to systematically describe the use of ordinal outcomes in contemporary RCTs. Specifically, we aim to (i) identify which target parameters are of interest in trials that use an ordinal outcome; (ii) describe how ordinal outcomes are analysed in RCTs to estimate a treatment effect; and (iii) describe whether RCTs that use an ordinal outcome adequately report key methodological aspects specific to the analysis of the outcome.
Results from this review will outline the current state of practice of the use of ordinal outcomes in RCTs. Ways to improve the analysis and reporting of ordinal outcomes in RCTs will be discussed. We will review RCTs that are published in the top four medical journals (BMJ, NEJM, The Lancet and JAMA) between 1 January 2012 and 31 July 2022 that use an ordinal outcome. The review will be conducted using PubMed. Our review will adhere to guidelines for scoping reviews as described in the PRISMA-ScR checklist. The study characteristics and design, including the target parameter(s) and statistical methods will be extracted from eligible studies. The data will be summarised using descriptive statistics.
△ Less
Submitted 12 August, 2022;
originally announced August 2022.
-
Making SMART decisions in prophylaxis and treatment studies
Authors:
Robert K. Mahar,
Katherine J. Lee,
Bibhas Chakraborty,
Agus Salim,
Julie A. Simpson
Abstract:
The optimal prophylaxis, and treatment if the prophylaxis fails, for a disease may be best evaluated using a sequential multiple assignment randomised trial (SMART). A SMART is a multi-stage study that randomises a participant to an initial treatment, observes some response to that treatment and then, depending on their observed response, randomises the same participant to an alternative treatment…
▽ More
The optimal prophylaxis, and treatment if the prophylaxis fails, for a disease may be best evaluated using a sequential multiple assignment randomised trial (SMART). A SMART is a multi-stage study that randomises a participant to an initial treatment, observes some response to that treatment and then, depending on their observed response, randomises the same participant to an alternative treatment. Response adaptive randomisation may, in some settings, improve the trial participants' outcomes and expedite trial conclusions, compared to fixed randomisation. But 'myopic' response adaptive randomisation strategies, blind to multistage dynamics, may also result in suboptimal treatment assignments. We propose a 'dynamic' response adaptive randomisation strategy based on Q-learning, an approximate dynamic programming algorithm. Q-learning uses stage-wise statistical models and backward induction to incorporate late-stage 'payoffs' (i.e. clinical outcomes) into early-stage 'actions' (i.e. treatments). Our real-world example consists of a COVID-19 prophylaxis and treatment SMART with qualitatively different binary endpoints at each stage. Standard Q-learning does not work with such data because it cannot be used for sequences of binary endpoints. Sequences of qualitatively distinct endpoints may also require different weightings to ensure that the design guides participants to regimens with the highest utility. We describe how a simple decision-theoretic extension to Q-learning can be used to handle sequential binary endpoints with distinct utilities. Using simulation we show that, under a set of binary utilities, the 'dynamic' approach increases expected participant utility compared to the fixed approach, sometimes markedly, for all model parameters, whereas the 'myopic' approach can actually decrease utility.
△ Less
Submitted 24 March, 2022;
originally announced March 2022.
-
Bayesian modelling of lung function data from multiple-breath washout tests
Authors:
Robert K. Mahar,
John B. Carlin,
Sarath Ranganathan,
Anne-Louise Ponsonby,
Peter Vuillermin,
Damjan Vukcevic
Abstract:
Paediatric respiratory researchers have widely adopted the multiple-breath washout (MBW) test because it allows assessment of lung function in unsedated infants and is well suited to longitudinal studies of lung development and disease. However, a substantial proportion of MBW tests in infants fail current acceptability criteria. We hypothesised that a model-based approach to analysing the data, i…
▽ More
Paediatric respiratory researchers have widely adopted the multiple-breath washout (MBW) test because it allows assessment of lung function in unsedated infants and is well suited to longitudinal studies of lung development and disease. However, a substantial proportion of MBW tests in infants fail current acceptability criteria. We hypothesised that a model-based approach to analysing the data, in place of traditional simple empirical summaries, would enable more efficient use of these tests. We therefore developed a novel statistical model for infant MBW data and applied it to 1,197 tests from 432 individuals from a large birth cohort study. We focus on Bayesian estimation of the lung clearance index (LCI), the most commonly used summary of lung function from MBW tests. Our results show that the model provides an excellent fit to the data and shed further light on statistical properties of the standard empirical approach. Furthermore, the modelling approach enables LCI to be estimated using tests with different degrees of completeness, something not possible with the standard approach. Our model therefore allows previously unused data to be used rather than discarded, as well as routine use of shorter tests without significant loss of precision. Beyond our specific application, our work illustrates a number of important aspects of Bayesian modelling in practice, such as the importance of hierarchical specifications to account for repeated measurements and the value of model checking via posterior predictive distributions.
△ Less
Submitted 5 November, 2017; v1 submitted 27 December, 2016;
originally announced December 2016.
