Does accounting for seizure frequency variability increase clinical trial power?

阅读:4
作者:Goldenholz Daniel M, Goldenholz Shira R, Moss Robert, French Jacqueline, Lowenstein Daniel, Kuzniecky Ruben, Haut Sheryl, Cristofaro Sabrina, Detyniecki Kamil, Hixson John, Karoly Philippa, Cook Mark, Strashny Alex, Theodore William H, Pieper Carl
OBJECTIVE: Seizure frequency variability is associated with placebo responses in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Increased variability can result in drug misclassification and, hence, decreased statistical power. We investigated a new method that directly incorporated variability into RCT analysis, Z(V). METHODS: Two models were assessed: the traditional 50%-responder rate (RR50), and the variability-corrected score, Z(V). Each predicted seizure frequency upper and lower limits using prior seizures. Accuracy was defined as percentage of time-intervals when the observed seizure frequencies were within the predicted limits. First, we tested the Z(V) method on three datasets (SeizureTracker: n=3016, Human Epilepsy Project: n=107, and NeuroVista: n=15). An additional independent SeizureTracker validation dataset was used to generate a set of 200 simulated trials each for 5 different sample sizes (total N=100 to 500 by 100), assuming 20% dropout and 30% drug efficacy. "Power" was determined as the percentage of trials successfully distinguishing placebo from drug (p<0.05). RESULTS: Prediction accuracy across datasets was, Z(V): 91-100%, RR50: 42-80%. Simulated RCT Z(V) analysis achieved >90% power at N=100 per arm while RR50 required N=200 per arm. SIGNIFICANCE: Z(V) may increase the statistical power of an RCT relative to the traditional RR50.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。