Group sequential design using restricted mean survival time as the primary endpoint in clinical trials.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Statistical Methods in Medical Research Pub Date : 2025-01-19 DOI:10.1177/09622802241304111
Zhaojin Li, Xiang Geng, Yawen Hou, Zheng Chen
{"title":"Group sequential design using restricted mean survival time as the primary endpoint in clinical trials.","authors":"Zhaojin Li, Xiang Geng, Yawen Hou, Zheng Chen","doi":"10.1177/09622802241304111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The proportional hazards (PH) assumption is often violated in clinical trials. If the most commonly used Log-rank test is used for trial design in non-proportional hazard (NPH) cases, it will result in power loss or inflation, and the effect measures hazard ratio will become difficult to interpret. To circumvent the issue caused by the NPH for trial design and to make the effect measures easy to interpret and communicate, two simulation-free methods about restricted mean survival time group sequential (GS-RMST) design are introduced in this study: the independent increment GS-RMST (GS-RMSTi) design and the non-independent increment GS-RMST (GS-RMSTn) design. For the above two designs, the corresponding analytic expression of the variance-covariance matrix, the calculations of the stopping boundaries and sample size are given in the study. Simulation studies show that both designs can achieve the corresponding nominal type I error and nominal power. The GS-RMSTn simulation studies show that the Max-Combo test group sequential design is robust in different NPH scenarios and is suitable for discovering whether there is a treatment effect difference. However, it does not have a corresponding easy-to-interpret effect measure indicating effect difference magnitude. GS-RMST performs well in both PH and NPH scenarios, and it can obtain time-scale effect measures that are easy to understand by both physicians and patients. Examples of both GS-RMST designs are also illustrated.</p>","PeriodicalId":22038,"journal":{"name":"Statistical Methods in Medical Research","volume":" ","pages":"9622802241304111"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistical Methods in Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09622802241304111","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The proportional hazards (PH) assumption is often violated in clinical trials. If the most commonly used Log-rank test is used for trial design in non-proportional hazard (NPH) cases, it will result in power loss or inflation, and the effect measures hazard ratio will become difficult to interpret. To circumvent the issue caused by the NPH for trial design and to make the effect measures easy to interpret and communicate, two simulation-free methods about restricted mean survival time group sequential (GS-RMST) design are introduced in this study: the independent increment GS-RMST (GS-RMSTi) design and the non-independent increment GS-RMST (GS-RMSTn) design. For the above two designs, the corresponding analytic expression of the variance-covariance matrix, the calculations of the stopping boundaries and sample size are given in the study. Simulation studies show that both designs can achieve the corresponding nominal type I error and nominal power. The GS-RMSTn simulation studies show that the Max-Combo test group sequential design is robust in different NPH scenarios and is suitable for discovering whether there is a treatment effect difference. However, it does not have a corresponding easy-to-interpret effect measure indicating effect difference magnitude. GS-RMST performs well in both PH and NPH scenarios, and it can obtain time-scale effect measures that are easy to understand by both physicians and patients. Examples of both GS-RMST designs are also illustrated.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
采用限制平均生存时间作为临床试验主要终点的组序贯设计。
在临床试验中,比例风险(PH)假设经常被违反。在非比例危害(non-proportional hazard, NPH)情况下,如果采用最常用的Log-rank检验进行试验设计,将会导致功率损失或膨胀,并且影响测量的风险比将变得难以解释。为了规避NPH对试验设计造成的问题,并使效果测量易于解释和交流,本研究引入了两种限制平均生存时间组序列(GS-RMST)设计的无模拟方法:独立增量GS-RMST (GS-RMSTi)设计和非独立增量GS-RMST (GS-RMSTn)设计。对于上述两种设计,本文给出了方差-协方差矩阵的解析表达式、停止边界的计算和样本量。仿真研究表明,两种设计都能达到相应的标称I型误差和标称功率。GS-RMSTn仿真研究表明,Max-Combo试验组序贯设计在不同NPH场景下具有鲁棒性,适用于发现治疗效果是否存在差异。然而,它没有一个相应的易于解释的效果测量,表明效果差异的大小。GS-RMST在PH和NPH两种情况下都表现良好,并且可以获得医生和患者都易于理解的时间尺度效应测量。还举例说明了两种GS-RMST设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Statistical Methods in Medical Research
Statistical Methods in Medical Research 医学-数学与计算生物学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
127
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Statistical Methods in Medical Research is a peer reviewed scholarly journal and is the leading vehicle for articles in all the main areas of medical statistics and an essential reference for all medical statisticians. This unique journal is devoted solely to statistics and medicine and aims to keep professionals abreast of the many powerful statistical techniques now available to the medical profession. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Multicategory matched learning for estimating optimal individualized treatment rules in observational studies with application to a hepatocellular carcinoma study. Semiparametric estimator for the covariate-specific receiver operating characteristic curve. A contaminated regression model for count health data. Efficient estimation of the marginal mean of recurrent events in randomized controlled trials. Group sequential design using restricted mean survival time as the primary endpoint in clinical trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1