Literature DB >> 22287602

Minimal sufficient balance-a new strategy to balance baseline covariates and preserve randomness of treatment allocation.

Wenle Zhao1, Michael D Hill2, Yuko Palesch3.   

Abstract

In many clinical trials, baseline covariates could affect the primary outcome. Commonly used strategies to balance baseline covariates include stratified constrained randomization and minimization. Stratification is limited to few categorical covariates. Minimization lacks the randomness of treatment allocation. Both apply only to categorical covariates. As a result, serious imbalances could occur in important baseline covariates not included in the randomization algorithm. Furthermore, randomness of treatment allocation could be significantly compromised because of the high proportion of deterministic assignments associated with stratified block randomization and minimization, potentially resulting in selection bias. Serious baseline covariate imbalances and selection biases often contribute to controversial interpretation of the trial results. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke recombinant tissue plasminogen activator Stroke Trial and the Captopril Prevention Project are two examples. In this article, we propose a new randomization strategy, termed the minimal sufficient balance randomization, which will dually prevent serious imbalances in all important baseline covariates, including both categorical and continuous types, and preserve the randomness of treatment allocation. Computer simulations are conducted using the data from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke recombinant tissue plasminogen activator Stroke Trial. Serious imbalances in four continuous and one categorical covariate are prevented with a small cost in treatment allocation randomness. A scenario of simultaneously balancing 11 baseline covariates is explored with similar promising results. The proposed minimal sufficient balance randomization algorithm can be easily implemented in computerized central randomization systems for large multicenter trials.
© The Author(s) 2011.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical trial; baseline covariate imbalance; minimal sufficient balance; randomization; treatment allocation randomness

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22287602      PMCID: PMC3474894          DOI: 10.1177/0962280212436447

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  28 in total

1.  Quantifying the cost in power of ignoring continuous covariate imbalances in clinical trial randomization.

Authors:  Jody Ciolino; Wenle Zhao; Renee' Martin; Yuko Palesch
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2010-11-13       Impact factor: 2.226

2.  The impact of randomization on the analysis of clinical trials.

Authors:  Gerd K Rosenkranz
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-09-27       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  NINDS Reanalysis Committee's reanalysis of the NINDS trial.

Authors:  Jeffrey Mann
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2005-01-06       Impact factor: 7.914

4.  Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials.

Authors:  S F Assmann; S J Pocock; L E Enos; L E Kasten
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-03-25       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Minimization: a new method of assigning patients to treatment and control groups.

Authors:  D R Taves
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1974-05       Impact factor: 6.875

6.  Confirmation of tPA treatment effect by baseline severity-adjusted end point reanalysis of the NINDS-tPA stroke trials.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Saver; Banafsheh Yafeh
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2007-01-18       Impact factor: 7.914

7.  Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-12-14       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems.

Authors:  Stuart J Pocock; Susan E Assmann; Laura E Enos; Linda E Kasten
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Findings from the reanalysis of the NINDS tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke treatment trial.

Authors:  Timothy John Ingall; William Michael O'Fallon; Kjell Asplund; Lewis Robert Goldfrank; Vicki S Hertzberg; Thomas Arthur Louis; Teresa J Hengy Christianson
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2004-09-02       Impact factor: 7.914

10.  A user's guide to the NINDS rt-PA stroke trial database.

Authors:  Robert J Dachs; John H Burton; Jeremy Joslin
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  22 in total

Review 1.  On methodological standards in training and transfer experiments.

Authors:  C Shawn Green; Tilo Strobach; Torsten Schubert
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2013-12-18

2.  Statistical properties of minimal sufficient balance and minimization as methods for controlling baseline covariate imbalance at the design stage of sequential clinical trials.

Authors:  Steven D Lauzon; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan; Paul J Nietert; Jody D Ciolino; Michael D Hill; Wenle Zhao
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Comparison of statistical and operational properties of subject randomization procedures for large multicenter clinical trial treating medical emergencies.

Authors:  Wenle Zhao; Yunming Mu; Darren Tayama; Sharon D Yeatts
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 2.226

4.  Managing competing demands in the implementation of response-adaptive randomization in a large multicenter phase III acute stroke trial.

Authors:  Wenle Zhao; Valerie Durkalski
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Effect of High-Intensity Treadmill Exercise on Motor Symptoms in Patients With De Novo Parkinson Disease: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Margaret Schenkman; Charity G Moore; Wendy M Kohrt; Deborah A Hall; Anthony Delitto; Cynthia L Comella; Deborah A Josbeno; Cory L Christiansen; Brian D Berman; Benzi M Kluger; Edward L Melanson; Samay Jain; Julie A Robichaud; Cynthia Poon; Daniel M Corcos
Journal:  JAMA Neurol       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 18.302

6.  Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation vs Sham Stimulation to Treat Aphasia After Stroke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Julius Fridriksson; Chris Rorden; Jordan Elm; Souvik Sen; Mark S George; Leonardo Bonilha
Journal:  JAMA Neurol       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 18.302

7.  Design of Behavioral Economic Applications to Geriatrics Leveraging Electronic Health Records (BEAGLE): A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Tiffany Brown; Theresa A Rowe; Ji Young Lee; Lucia C Petito; Ryan Chmiel; Jody D Ciolino; Jason N Doctor; Craig R Fox; Noah J Goldstein; Darren Kaiser; Jeffrey A Linder; Daniella Meeker; Yaw Peprah; Stephen D Persell
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 2.226

8.  Impact of minimal sufficient balance, minimization, and stratified permuted blocks on bias and power in the estimation of treatment effect in sequential clinical trials with a binary endpoint.

Authors:  Steven D Lauzon; Wenle Zhao; Paul J Nietert; Jody D Ciolino; Michael D Hill; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 2.494

9.  The Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) trial protocol: a randomized, blinded, efficacy trial of standard vs. intensive hyperglycemia management in acute stroke.

Authors:  Askiel Bruno; Valerie L Durkalski; Christiana E Hall; Rattan Juneja; William G Barsan; Scott Janis; William J Meurer; Amy Fansler; Karen C Johnston
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 5.266

10.  Innovation in a Learning Health Care System: Veteran-Directed Home- and Community-Based Services.

Authors:  Melissa M Garrido; Richard M Allman; Steven D Pizer; James L Rudolph; Kali S Thomas; Nina R Sperber; Courtney H Van Houtven; Austin B Frakt
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 5.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.