Literature DB >> 28868630

A model-based conditional power assessment for decision making in randomized controlled trial studies.

Baiming Zou1, Jianwen Cai2, Gary G Koch2, Haibo Zhou2, Fei Zou1.   

Abstract

Conditional power based on summary statistic by comparing outcomes (such as the sample mean) directly between 2 groups is a convenient tool for decision making in randomized controlled trial studies. In this paper, we extend the traditional summary statistic-based conditional power with a general model-based assessment strategy, where the test statistic is based on a regression model. Asymptotic relationships between parameter estimates based on the observed interim data and final unobserved data are established, from which we develop an analytic model-based conditional power assessment for both Gaussian and non-Gaussian data. The model-based strategy is not only flexible in handling baseline covariates and more powerful in detecting the treatment effects compared with the conventional method but also more robust in controlling the overall type I error under certain missing data mechanisms. The performance of the proposed method is evaluated by extensive simulation studies and illustrated with an application to a clinical study.
Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  conditional power; consistency; maximum likelihood estimate; multivariate normal; nonlinear data; randomized controlled trial

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28868630      PMCID: PMC5995155          DOI: 10.1002/sim.7454

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


  13 in total

1.  Modification of sample size in group sequential clinical trials.

Authors:  L Cui; H M Hung; S J Wang
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  A sample size adjustment procedure for clinical trials based on conditional power.

Authors:  Gang Li; Weichung J Shih; Tailiang Xie; Jiang Lu
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 5.899

3.  Stratification for the propensity score compared with linear regression techniques to assess the effect of treatment or exposure.

Authors:  Stephen Senn; Erika Graf; Angelika Caputo
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-12-30       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Effect of platelet inhibition with cangrelor during PCI on ischemic events.

Authors:  Deepak L Bhatt; Gregg W Stone; Kenneth W Mahaffey; C Michael Gibson; P Gabriel Steg; Christian W Hamm; Matthew J Price; Sergio Leonardi; Dianne Gallup; Ezio Bramucci; Peter W Radke; Petr Widimský; Frantisek Tousek; Jeffrey Tauth; Douglas Spriggs; Brent T McLaurin; Dominick J Angiolillo; Philippe Généreux; Tiepu Liu; Jayne Prats; Meredith Todd; Simona Skerjanec; Harvey D White; Robert A Harrington
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-03-10       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Covariate imbalance and random allocation in clinical trials.

Authors:  S J Senn
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Continuous covariate imbalance and conditional power for clinical trial interim analyses.

Authors:  Jody D Ciolino; Renee' H Martin; Wenle Zhao; Edward C Jauch; Michael D Hill; Yuko Y Palesch
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 2.226

7.  The B-value: a tool for monitoring data.

Authors:  K K Lan; J Wittes
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Azithromycin for prevention of exacerbations of COPD.

Authors:  Richard K Albert; John Connett; William C Bailey; Richard Casaburi; J Allen D Cooper; Gerard J Criner; Jeffrey L Curtis; Mark T Dransfield; Meilan K Han; Stephen C Lazarus; Barry Make; Nathaniel Marchetti; Fernando J Martinez; Nancy E Madinger; Charlene McEvoy; Dennis E Niewoehner; Janos Porsasz; Connie S Price; John Reilly; Paul D Scanlon; Frank C Sciurba; Steven M Scharf; George R Washko; Prescott G Woodruff; Nicholas R Anthonisen
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-08-25       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Designed extension of studies based on conditional power.

Authors:  M A Proschan; S A Hunsberger
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.