Sensitivity Analysis of Per-Protocol Time-to-Event Treatment Efficacy in Randomized Clinical Trials

被引:5
|
作者
Gilbert, Peter B. [1 ,2 ]
Shepherd, Bryan E. [3 ]
Hudgens, Michael G. [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Dept Biostat, Seattle, WA 98109 USA
[2] Fred Hutchinson Canc Res Ctr, Vaccine & Infect Dis Div, Seattle, WA 98109 USA
[3] Vanderbilt Univ, Sch Med, Dept Biostat, Nashville, TN 37232 USA
[4] Univ N Carolina, Dept Biostat, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
关键词
Causal inference; Exclusion restriction; Ignorance region; Intention to treat; Principal stratification; Selection bias; ADJUSTMENT; OUTCOMES; MODELS;
D O I
10.1080/01621459.2013.786649
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Assessing per-protocol (PP) treatment efficacy on a time-to-event endpoint is a common objective of randomized clinical trials. The typical analysis uses the same method employed for the intention-to-treat analysis (e.g., standard survival analysis) applied to the subgroup meeting protocol adherence criteria. However, due to potential post-randomization selection bias, this analysis may mislead about treatment efficacy. Moreover, while there is extensive literature on methods for assessing causal treatment effects in compliers, these methods do not apply to a common class of trials where (a) the primary objective compares survival curves, (b) it is inconceivable to assign participants to be adherent and event free before adherence is measured, and (c) the exclusion restriction assumption fails to hold. HIV vaccine efficacy trials including the recent RV144 trial exemplify this class, because many primary endpoints (e.g., HIV infections) occur before adherence is measured, and nonadherent subjects who receive some of the planned immunizations may be partially protected. Therefore, we develop methods for assessing PP treatment efficacy for this problem class, considering three causal estimands of interest. Because these estimands are not identifiable from the observable data, we develop nonparametric bounds and semiparametric sensitivity analysis methods that yield estimated ignorance and uncertainty intervals. The methods are applied to RV144. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.
引用
收藏
页码:789 / 800
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Cervical pessaries to prevent preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy: a per-protocol analysis of a randomized clinical trial
    Liem, Sophie M. S.
    Schuit, Ewoud
    van Pampus, Marielle G.
    van Melick, Marjo
    Monfrance, Maurice
    Langenveld, Josje
    Mol, Ben W. J.
    Bekedam, Dick
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2016, 95 (04) : 444 - 451
  • [22] Protocol of the Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer trials (DATECAN) project: Formal consensus method for the development of guidelines for standardised time-to-event endpoints' definitions in cancer clinical trials
    Bellera, Carine A.
    Pulido, Marina
    Gourgou, Sophie
    Collette, Laurence
    Doussau, Adelaide
    Kramar, Andrew
    Dabakuyo, Tienhan Sandrine
    Ouali, Monia
    Auperin, Anne
    Filleron, Thomas
    Fortpied, Catherine
    Le Tourneau, Christophe
    Paoletti, Xavier
    Mauer, Murielle
    Mathoulin-Pelissier, Simone
    Bonnetain, Franck
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2013, 49 (04) : 769 - 781
  • [23] A comparison of the results of intent-to-treat, per-protocol, and g-estimation in the presence of non-random treatment changes in a time-to-event non-inferiority trial
    Matsuyama, Yutaka
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2010, 29 (20) : 2107 - 2116
  • [24] Assurance calculations for planning clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes
    Ren, Shijie
    Oakley, Jeremy E.
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2014, 33 (01) : 31 - 45
  • [25] A Bayesian Sequential Design for Clinical Trials With Time-to-Event Outcomes
    Zhu, Lin
    Yu, Qingzhao
    Mercante, Donald E.
    STATISTICS IN BIOPHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 11 (04): : 387 - 397
  • [26] Milestone prediction for time-to-event endpoint monitoring in clinical trials
    Ou, Fang-Shu
    Heller, Martin
    Shi, Qian
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2019, 18 (04) : 433 - 446
  • [27] Projection of power and events in clinical trials with a time-to-event outcome
    Royston, Patrick
    Barthel, Friederike M-S
    STATA JOURNAL, 2010, 10 (03): : 386 - 394
  • [28] Predicting study duration in clinical trials with a time-to-event endpoint
    Machida, Ryunosuke
    Fujii, Yosuke
    Sozu, Takashi
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2021, 40 (10) : 2413 - 2421
  • [29] Group sequential testing for cluster randomized trials with time-to-event endpoint
    Li, Jianghao
    Jung, Sin-Ho
    BIOMETRICS, 2022, 78 (04) : 1353 - 1364
  • [30] Interpreting the Results of Intention-to-Treat, Per-Protocol, and As-Treated Analyses of Clinical Trials
    Smith, Valerie A.
    Coffman, Cynthia J.
    Hudgens, Michael G.
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2021, 326 (05): : 433 - 434