Estimating counterfactual placebo HIV incidence in HIV prevention trials without placebo arms based on markers of HIV exposure.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Clinical Trials Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-25 DOI:10.1177/17407745231203327
Yifan Zhu, Fei Gao, David V Glidden, Deborah Donnell, Holly Janes
{"title":"Estimating counterfactual placebo HIV incidence in HIV prevention trials without placebo arms based on markers of HIV exposure.","authors":"Yifan Zhu, Fei Gao, David V Glidden, Deborah Donnell, Holly Janes","doi":"10.1177/17407745231203327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Developing alternative approaches to evaluating absolute efficacy of new HIV prevention interventions is a priority, as active-controlled designs, whereby individuals without HIV are randomized to the experimental intervention or an active control known to be effective, are increasing. With this design, however, the efficacy of the experimental intervention to prevent HIV acquisition relative to placebo cannot be evaluated directly.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One proposed approach to estimate absolute prevention efficacy is to use an HIV exposure marker, such as incident rectal gonorrhea, to infer counterfactual placebo HIV incidence. We formalize a statistical framework for this approach, specify working regression and likelihood-based estimation approaches, lay out three assumptions under which valid inference can be achieved, evaluate finite-sample performance, and illustrate the approach using a recent active-controlled HIV prevention trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We find that in finite samples and under correctly specified assumptions accurate and precise estimates of counterfactual placebo incidence and prevention efficacy are produced. Based on data from the DISCOVER trial in men and transgender women who have sex with men, and assuming correctly specified assumptions, the estimated prevention efficacy for tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine is 98.1% (95% confidence interval: 96.4%-99.4%) using the working model approach and 98.1% (95% confidence interval: 96.4%-99.7%) using the likelihood-based approach.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Careful assessment of the underlying assumptions, study of their violation, evaluation of the approach in trials with placebo arms, and advancement of improved exposure markers are needed before the HIV exposure marker approach can be relied upon in practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"114-123"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11361381/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745231203327","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Developing alternative approaches to evaluating absolute efficacy of new HIV prevention interventions is a priority, as active-controlled designs, whereby individuals without HIV are randomized to the experimental intervention or an active control known to be effective, are increasing. With this design, however, the efficacy of the experimental intervention to prevent HIV acquisition relative to placebo cannot be evaluated directly.

Methods: One proposed approach to estimate absolute prevention efficacy is to use an HIV exposure marker, such as incident rectal gonorrhea, to infer counterfactual placebo HIV incidence. We formalize a statistical framework for this approach, specify working regression and likelihood-based estimation approaches, lay out three assumptions under which valid inference can be achieved, evaluate finite-sample performance, and illustrate the approach using a recent active-controlled HIV prevention trial.

Results: We find that in finite samples and under correctly specified assumptions accurate and precise estimates of counterfactual placebo incidence and prevention efficacy are produced. Based on data from the DISCOVER trial in men and transgender women who have sex with men, and assuming correctly specified assumptions, the estimated prevention efficacy for tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine is 98.1% (95% confidence interval: 96.4%-99.4%) using the working model approach and 98.1% (95% confidence interval: 96.4%-99.7%) using the likelihood-based approach.

Conclusion: Careful assessment of the underlying assumptions, study of their violation, evaluation of the approach in trials with placebo arms, and advancement of improved exposure markers are needed before the HIV exposure marker approach can be relied upon in practice.

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
在无安慰剂组的HIV预防试验中,基于HIV暴露标记估计反事实安慰剂HIV发病率。
引言:开发评估新的艾滋病毒预防干预措施绝对疗效的替代方法是一个优先事项,因为主动对照设计正在增加,即将未感染艾滋病毒的人随机分配到实验干预或已知有效的主动对照中。然而,采用这种设计,相对于安慰剂,预防HIV感染的实验干预的疗效无法直接评估。方法:一种估计绝对预防效果的方法是使用HIV暴露标志物,如直肠淋病,来推断与安慰剂相反的HIV发病率。我们为这种方法形式化了一个统计框架,指定了工作回归和基于似然的估计方法,列出了可以实现有效推断的三个假设,评估了有限样本的性能,并使用最近的一项主动对照HIV预防试验来说明这种方法。结果:我们发现,在有限的样本中,在正确指定的假设下,对反事实安慰剂的发生率和预防效果进行了准确和精确的估计。根据DISCOVER试验在男性和与男性发生性关系的变性女性中的数据,并假设正确指定的假设,使用工作模型方法,替诺福韦-阿拉芬酰胺加恩曲他滨的估计预防效果为98.1%(95%置信区间:96.4%-99.4%),使用基于可能性的方法,估计预防效果是98.1%(95%置信区间:96.4%-99.7%)。结论:在实践中依赖HIV暴露标志物方法之前,需要仔细评估基本假设,研究其违反情况,评估安慰剂组试验中的方法,并改进暴露标志物。
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
Clinical Trials
Clinical Trials 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
82
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Trials is dedicated to advancing knowledge on the design and conduct of clinical trials related research methodologies. Covering the design, conduct, analysis, synthesis and evaluation of key methodologies, the journal remains on the cusp of the latest topics, including ethics, regulation and policy impact.
期刊最新文献
Challenges in conducting efficacy trials for new COVID-19 vaccines in developed countries. Society for Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committee initiative website: Closing the gap. A comparison of computational algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of clinical trials. Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist monitoring boundaries motivated by the Multiplatform Randomized Clinical Trial. Efficient designs for three-sequence stepped wedge trials with continuous recruitment.
×
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