Literature DB >> 23071073

Efficiency of study designs in diagnostic randomized clinical trials.

Bo Lu1, Constantine Gatsonis.   

Abstract

From the patients' management perspective, a good diagnostic test should contribute to both reflecting the true disease status and improving clinical outcomes. The diagnostic randomized clinical trial is designed to combine both diagnostic tests and therapeutic interventions. Evaluation of diagnostic tests is carried out with therapeutic outcomes as the primary endpoint rather than test accuracy. We lay out the probability framework for evaluating such trials. We compare two commonly referred designs-the two-arm design and the paired design-in a formal statistical hypothesis testing setup and identify the causal connection between the two tests. The paired design is shown to be more efficient than the two-arm design. The efficiency gains vary depending on the discordant rates of test results. We derive sample size formulas for both binary and continuous endpoints. We derive estimation of important quantities under the paired design and also conduct simulation studies to verify the theoretical results. We illustrate the method with an example of designing a randomized study on preoperative staging of bladder cancer.
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23071073      PMCID: PMC3600406          DOI: 10.1002/sim.5655

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  16 in total

Review 1.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Eric Winquist; Tricia S Kirchner; Roanne Segal; Joseph Chin; Himu Lukka
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 2.  Assessing the value of diagnostic tests: a framework for designing and evaluating trials.

Authors:  Lavinia Ferrante di Ruffano; Christopher J Hyde; Kirsten J McCaffery; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Jonathan J Deeks
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-02-21

Review 3.  Clinical trial designs for predictive marker validation in cancer treatment trials.

Authors:  Daniel J Sargent; Barbara A Conley; Carmen Allegra; Laurence Collette
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-03-20       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  FDG-PET for preoperative staging of bladder cancer.

Authors:  O Drieskens; R Oyen; H Van Poppel; Y Vankan; P Flamen; L Mortelmans
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2005-08-31       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Lymphadenectomy in patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder; significance for staging and prognosis.

Authors:  J Leissner; R Hohenfellner; J W Thüroff; H K Wolf
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  The diagnostic randomized clinical trial is the best solution for management issues in critical limb ischemia.

Authors:  Jurgen C de Graaff; Dirk Th Ubbink; Jan G P Tijssen; Dink A Legemate
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Evaluation of toe pressure and transcutaneous oxygen measurements in management of chronic critical leg ischemia: a diagnostic randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Jurgen C de Graaff; Dirk Th Ubbink; Dink A Legemate; Jan G p Tijssen; Michael J h m Jacobs
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.268

8.  Urinary bladder cancer: preoperative nodal staging with ferumoxtran-10-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Willem M L L G Deserno; Mukesh G Harisinghani; Matthias Taupitz; Gerrit J Jager; J Alfred Witjes; Peter F Mulders; Christina A Hulsbergen van de Kaa; D Kaufmann; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-09-16       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 9.  Systematic review of statistical methods used in molecular marker studies in cancer.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Kwang Jang; Daniel Sargent; Hans Lilja; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 10.  Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial.

Authors:  Jan Bogaerts; Fatima Cardoso; Marc Buyse; Sofia Braga; Sherene Loi; Jillian A Harrison; Jacques Bines; Stella Mook; Nuria Decker; Peter Ravdin; Patrick Therasse; Emiel Rutgers; Laura J van 't Veer; Martine Piccart
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Oncol       Date:  2006-10
View more
  10 in total

1.  Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests.

Authors:  Brendan J Barrett; John M Fardy
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2021

2.  A flexible, multifaceted approach is needed in health technology assessment of PET.

Authors:  Issa J Dahabreh; Constantine Gatsonis
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 3.  Beyond Correlations, Sensitivities, and Specificities: A Roadmap for Demonstrating Utility of Advanced Imaging in Oncology Treatment and Clinical Trial Design.

Authors:  Erich P Huang; Frank I Lin; Lalitha K Shankar
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Studies for the Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests–Part 28 of a Series on Evaluation of Scientific Publications.

Authors:  Annika Hoyer; Antonia Zapf
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  Foundational Considerations for Artificial Intelligence Using Ophthalmic Images.

Authors:  Michael D Abràmoff; Brad Cunningham; Bakul Patel; Malvina B Eydelman; Theodore Leng; Taiji Sakamoto; Barbara Blodi; S Marlene Grenon; Risa M Wolf; Arjun K Manrai; Justin M Ko; Michael F Chiang; Danton Char
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2021-08-31       Impact factor: 14.277

Review 6.  Statistical controversies in clinical research: prognostic gene signatures are not (yet) useful in clinical practice.

Authors:  S Michiels; N Ternès; F Rotolo
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 32.976

7.  Can hysterosalpingo-foam sonography replace hysterosalpingography as first-choice tubal patency test? A randomized non-inferiority trial.

Authors:  Nienke van Welie; Joukje van Rijswijk; Kim Dreyer; Machiel H A van Hooff; Jan Peter de Bruin; Harold R Verhoeve; Femke Mol; Wilhelmina M van Baal; Maaike A F Traas; Arno M van Peperstraten; Arentje P Manger; Judith Gianotten; Cornelia H de Koning; Aafke M H Koning; Neriman Bayram; David P van der Ham; Francisca P J M Vrouenraets; Michaela Kalafusova; Bob I G van de Laar; Jeroen Kaijser; Arjon F Lambeek; Wouter J Meijer; Frank J M Broekmans; Olivier Valkenburg; Lucy F van der Voet; Jeroen van Disseldorp; Marieke J Lambers; Rachel Tros; Cornelis B Lambalk; Jaap Stoker; Madelon van Wely; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Ben Willem J Mol; Velja Mijatovic
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2022-05-03       Impact factor: 6.353

Review 8.  Regulatory Agencies and PET/CT Imaging in the Clinic.

Authors:  Peter Herscovitch
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 3.955

9.  The FOAM study: is Hysterosalpingo foam sonography (HyFoSy) a cost-effective alternative for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Joukje van Rijswijk; Nienke van Welie; Kim Dreyer; Machiel H A van Hooff; Jan Peter de Bruin; Harold R Verhoeve; Femke Mol; Kimiko A Kleiman-Broeze; Maaike A F Traas; Guido J J M Muijsers; Arentje P Manger; Judith Gianotten; Cornelia H de Koning; Aafke M H Koning; Neriman Bayram; David P van der Ham; Francisca P J M Vrouenraets; Michaela Kalafusova; Bob I G van de Laar; Jeroen Kaijser; Miriam F van Oostwaard; Wouter J Meijer; Frank J M Broekmans; Olivier Valkenburg; Lucy F van der Voet; Jeroen van Disseldorp; Marieke J Lambers; Henrike E Peters; Marit C I Lier; Cornelis B Lambalk; Madelon van Wely; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Jaap Stoker; Fulco van der Veen; Ben W J Mol; Velja Mijatovic
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 2.809

10.  Randomized test-treatment studies with an outlook on adaptive designs.

Authors:  Werner Vach; Antonia Zapf; Amra Hot; Patrick M Bossuyt; Oke Gerke; Simone Wahl
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 4.615

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.