根据多项试验的综合数据对次级假设进行确证检验的新策略。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Clinical Trials Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-04 DOI:10.1177/17407745231214382
Marc Vandemeulebroecke, Dieter A Häring, Eva Hua, Xiaoling Wei, Dong Xi
{"title":"根据多项试验的综合数据对次级假设进行确证检验的新策略。","authors":"Marc Vandemeulebroecke, Dieter A Häring, Eva Hua, Xiaoling Wei, Dong Xi","doi":"10.1177/17407745231214382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pivotal evidence of efficacy of a new drug is typically generated by (at least) two clinical trials which independently provide statistically significant and mutually corroborating evidence of efficacy based on a primary endpoint. In this situation, showing drug effects on clinically important secondary objectives can be demanding in terms of sample size requirements. Statistically efficient methods to power for such endpoints while controlling the Type I error are needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We review existing strategies for establishing claims on important but sample size-intense secondary endpoints. We present new strategies based on combined data from two independent, identically designed and concurrent trials, controlling the Type I error at the submission level. We explain the methodology and provide three case studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Different strategies have been used for establishing secondary claims. One new strategy, involving a protocol planned analysis of combined data across trials, and controlling the Type I error at the submission level, is particularly efficient. It has already been successfully used in support of label claims. Regulatory views on this strategy differ.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Inference on combined data across trials is a useful approach for generating pivotal evidence of efficacy for important but sample size-intense secondary endpoints. It requires careful preparation and regulatory discussion.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"171-179"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New strategies for confirmatory testing of secondary hypotheses on combined data from multiple trials.\",\"authors\":\"Marc Vandemeulebroecke, Dieter A Häring, Eva Hua, Xiaoling Wei, Dong Xi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17407745231214382\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pivotal evidence of efficacy of a new drug is typically generated by (at least) two clinical trials which independently provide statistically significant and mutually corroborating evidence of efficacy based on a primary endpoint. In this situation, showing drug effects on clinically important secondary objectives can be demanding in terms of sample size requirements. Statistically efficient methods to power for such endpoints while controlling the Type I error are needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We review existing strategies for establishing claims on important but sample size-intense secondary endpoints. We present new strategies based on combined data from two independent, identically designed and concurrent trials, controlling the Type I error at the submission level. We explain the methodology and provide three case studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Different strategies have been used for establishing secondary claims. One new strategy, involving a protocol planned analysis of combined data across trials, and controlling the Type I error at the submission level, is particularly efficient. It has already been successfully used in support of label claims. Regulatory views on this strategy differ.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Inference on combined data across trials is a useful approach for generating pivotal evidence of efficacy for important but sample size-intense secondary endpoints. It requires careful preparation and regulatory discussion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Trials\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"171-179\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745231214382\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17407745231214382","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:新药疗效的关键证据通常由(至少)两项临床试验产生,这两项临床试验根据一个主要终点,独立提供具有统计学意义且相互印证的疗效证据。在这种情况下,要显示药物对临床上重要的次要目标的影响,对样本量的要求可能会很高。我们需要在控制 I 类误差的同时,采用统计上有效的方法来提高此类终点的功率:方法:我们回顾了现有的对重要但样本量要求高的次要终点进行确证的策略。我们介绍了基于两个独立、设计相同且同时进行的试验的综合数据的新策略,并在提交水平上控制了 I 类误差。我们对方法进行了解释,并提供了三个案例研究:结果:在确定二次索赔时使用了不同的策略。其中一种新策略特别有效,它涉及对各试验的综合数据进行协议计划分析,并在提交水平上控制 I 类误差。它已成功用于支持标签声明。监管机构对这一策略的看法不一:结论:对于重要但样本量密集的次要终点,综合各试验数据进行推断是一种有用的方法,可为疗效提供关键证据。它需要精心准备和监管讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
New strategies for confirmatory testing of secondary hypotheses on combined data from multiple trials.

Background: Pivotal evidence of efficacy of a new drug is typically generated by (at least) two clinical trials which independently provide statistically significant and mutually corroborating evidence of efficacy based on a primary endpoint. In this situation, showing drug effects on clinically important secondary objectives can be demanding in terms of sample size requirements. Statistically efficient methods to power for such endpoints while controlling the Type I error are needed.

Methods: We review existing strategies for establishing claims on important but sample size-intense secondary endpoints. We present new strategies based on combined data from two independent, identically designed and concurrent trials, controlling the Type I error at the submission level. We explain the methodology and provide three case studies.

Results: Different strategies have been used for establishing secondary claims. One new strategy, involving a protocol planned analysis of combined data across trials, and controlling the Type I error at the submission level, is particularly efficient. It has already been successfully used in support of label claims. Regulatory views on this strategy differ.

Conclusions: Inference on combined data across trials is a useful approach for generating pivotal evidence of efficacy for important but sample size-intense secondary endpoints. It requires careful preparation and regulatory discussion.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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