使用真实世界数据模拟临床试验:一种新的方法和应用。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Medical Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.1177/0272989X221141381
Wei-Jhih Wang, Aasthaa Bansal, Caroline Savage Bennette, Anirban Basu
{"title":"使用真实世界数据模拟临床试验:一种新的方法和应用。","authors":"Wei-Jhih Wang,&nbsp;Aasthaa Bansal,&nbsp;Caroline Savage Bennette,&nbsp;Anirban Basu","doi":"10.1177/0272989X221141381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Simulating individual-level trial data when only summary data are available is often useful for meta-analysis, forming external control arms and calibrating trial results to real-world data (RWD). The joint distribution of baseline characteristics in a trial is usually simulated by combining its summary data with RWD's correlations. However, RWD correlations may not be a perfect proxy for the trial. A misspecified correlation structure could bias any analysis in which the outcomes generating models are nonlinear or include effect modifiers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed an iterative algorithm using copula and resampling, which was based on the estimated propensity score for the likelihood of enrollment in a trial given participants' characteristics. Validation was performed using Monte Carlo simulations under different scenarios in which the marginal and joint distributions of covariates differ between trial samples and RWD. Two applications were illustrated using an actual trial and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) to assess the generalizability of the trial and explored the feasibility of generating an external control by applying a parametric Weibull model trained in RWD to predict survival in the simulated trial cohort.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all scenarios, approximated correlations derived from the algorithm were closer to the true correlations than the RWD's correlations. The algorithm also successfully reproduced the joint distribution of characteristics for the actual trial. A similar SMD was observed using simulated data and individual-level trial data. The 95% confidence intervals were overlapped between adjusted survival estimates from the simulated trial and actual trial Kaplan-Meier estimates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The algorithm could be a feasible way to simulate individual-level data when only summary data are available. Further research is needed to validate our approach with larger sample sizes.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>The correlation structure is crucial to building the joint distribution of patient characteristics, and a misspecified correlation structure could potentially influence predicted outcomes.An iterative algorithm was developed to approximate a trial's correlation structure using published summary trial data and real-world data.The algorithm could be a feasible way to simulate individual-level trial data when only trial summary data are available.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":"43 3","pages":"275-287"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mimicking Clinical Trials Using Real-World Data: A Novel Method and Applications.\",\"authors\":\"Wei-Jhih Wang,&nbsp;Aasthaa Bansal,&nbsp;Caroline Savage Bennette,&nbsp;Anirban Basu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0272989X221141381\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Simulating individual-level trial data when only summary data are available is often useful for meta-analysis, forming external control arms and calibrating trial results to real-world data (RWD). The joint distribution of baseline characteristics in a trial is usually simulated by combining its summary data with RWD's correlations. However, RWD correlations may not be a perfect proxy for the trial. A misspecified correlation structure could bias any analysis in which the outcomes generating models are nonlinear or include effect modifiers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed an iterative algorithm using copula and resampling, which was based on the estimated propensity score for the likelihood of enrollment in a trial given participants' characteristics. Validation was performed using Monte Carlo simulations under different scenarios in which the marginal and joint distributions of covariates differ between trial samples and RWD. Two applications were illustrated using an actual trial and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) to assess the generalizability of the trial and explored the feasibility of generating an external control by applying a parametric Weibull model trained in RWD to predict survival in the simulated trial cohort.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all scenarios, approximated correlations derived from the algorithm were closer to the true correlations than the RWD's correlations. The algorithm also successfully reproduced the joint distribution of characteristics for the actual trial. A similar SMD was observed using simulated data and individual-level trial data. The 95% confidence intervals were overlapped between adjusted survival estimates from the simulated trial and actual trial Kaplan-Meier estimates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The algorithm could be a feasible way to simulate individual-level data when only summary data are available. Further research is needed to validate our approach with larger sample sizes.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>The correlation structure is crucial to building the joint distribution of patient characteristics, and a misspecified correlation structure could potentially influence predicted outcomes.An iterative algorithm was developed to approximate a trial's correlation structure using published summary trial data and real-world data.The algorithm could be a feasible way to simulate individual-level trial data when only trial summary data are available.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Decision Making\",\"volume\":\"43 3\",\"pages\":\"275-287\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X221141381\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X221141381","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在只有汇总数据的情况下,模拟个人水平的试验数据通常对meta分析有用,形成外部对照臂,并将试验结果校准为真实世界数据(RWD)。通常通过将试验的汇总数据与RWD的相关性相结合来模拟试验中基线特征的联合分布。然而,RWD相关性可能不是试验的完美代表。错误指定的相关结构可能会使任何结果生成模型是非线性的或包含效应修饰因子的分析产生偏差。方法:我们开发了一种使用copula和重新抽样的迭代算法,该算法基于给定参与者特征的试验入组可能性的估计倾向得分。在试验样本和RWD之间协变量的边际分布和联合分布不同的情况下,使用蒙特卡罗模拟进行验证。通过实际试验和监测、流行病学和最终结果-医疗保险数据说明了两种应用。我们计算了标准化平均差(SMD)来评估试验的普遍性,并通过应用RWD训练的参数威布尔模型来预测模拟试验队列的生存,探索产生外部控制的可行性。结果:在所有场景中,由算法得出的近似相关性比RWD的相关性更接近真实相关性。该算法还成功地再现了实际试验中特征的联合分布。使用模拟数据和个体水平试验数据观察到类似的SMD。95%置信区间在模拟试验的调整生存估计值和实际试验Kaplan-Meier估计值之间重叠。结论:在只有汇总数据的情况下,该算法是一种可行的模拟个人层面数据的方法。需要进一步的研究来验证我们的方法与更大的样本量。重点:相关结构对于建立患者特征的联合分布至关重要,错误指定的相关结构可能会影响预测结果。开发了一种迭代算法,利用已发表的总结试验数据和实际数据来近似试验的相关结构。在只有试验汇总数据的情况下,该算法是一种可行的模拟个体水平试验数据的方法。
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
Mimicking Clinical Trials Using Real-World Data: A Novel Method and Applications.

Introduction: Simulating individual-level trial data when only summary data are available is often useful for meta-analysis, forming external control arms and calibrating trial results to real-world data (RWD). The joint distribution of baseline characteristics in a trial is usually simulated by combining its summary data with RWD's correlations. However, RWD correlations may not be a perfect proxy for the trial. A misspecified correlation structure could bias any analysis in which the outcomes generating models are nonlinear or include effect modifiers.

Methods: We developed an iterative algorithm using copula and resampling, which was based on the estimated propensity score for the likelihood of enrollment in a trial given participants' characteristics. Validation was performed using Monte Carlo simulations under different scenarios in which the marginal and joint distributions of covariates differ between trial samples and RWD. Two applications were illustrated using an actual trial and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) to assess the generalizability of the trial and explored the feasibility of generating an external control by applying a parametric Weibull model trained in RWD to predict survival in the simulated trial cohort.

Results: Across all scenarios, approximated correlations derived from the algorithm were closer to the true correlations than the RWD's correlations. The algorithm also successfully reproduced the joint distribution of characteristics for the actual trial. A similar SMD was observed using simulated data and individual-level trial data. The 95% confidence intervals were overlapped between adjusted survival estimates from the simulated trial and actual trial Kaplan-Meier estimates.

Conclusions: The algorithm could be a feasible way to simulate individual-level data when only summary data are available. Further research is needed to validate our approach with larger sample sizes.

Highlights: The correlation structure is crucial to building the joint distribution of patient characteristics, and a misspecified correlation structure could potentially influence predicted outcomes.An iterative algorithm was developed to approximate a trial's correlation structure using published summary trial data and real-world data.The algorithm could be a feasible way to simulate individual-level trial data when only trial summary data are available.

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
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Unclear Trajectory and Uncertain Benefit: Creating a Lexicon for Clinical Uncertainty in Patients with Critical or Advanced Illness Using a Delphi Consensus Process. Multi-indication Evidence Synthesis in Oncology Health Technology Assessment: Meta-analysis Methods and Their Application to a Case Study of Bevacizumab. Use of Adaptive Conjoint Analysis-Based Values Clarification in a Patient Decision Aid Is Not Associated with Better Perceived Values Clarity or Reduced Decisional Conflict but Enhances Values Congruence. A Sequential Calibration Approach to Address Challenges of Repeated Calibration of a COVID-19 Model. A Longitudinal Study of the Association of Awareness of Disease Incurability with Patient-Reported Outcomes in Heart Failure.
×
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