Analysis of time-to-event and duration outcomes in neonatal clinical trials with twin births

被引:6
|
作者
Shaffer, Michele L. [1 ,2 ]
Hiriote, Sasiprapa [3 ]
机构
[1] Penn State Coll Med, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Hershey, PA USA
[2] Penn State Coll Med, Dept Pediat, Hershey, PA USA
[3] Penn State Univ, Dept Stat, State Coll, PA USA
关键词
Correlated data; Frailty models; Robust variance; FRAILTY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.cct.2008.11.001
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
When conducting neonatal trials in pre-term and/or low-birth-weight infants, twins may represent 10-20% of the study sample. Frailty models and proportional hazards regression with a robust sandwich variance estimate are common approaches for handling correlated time-to-event data or duration outcomes that are subject to censoring. However, the operating characteristics of these methods for mixes of correlated and independent time-to-event data are not well established. Simulation studies were conducted to compare frailty models and proportional hazards regression models with a robust sandwich variance estimate to standard proportional hazards regression models to estimate the treatment effect in two-armed clinical trials. While overall frailty models showed the best performance, caution must be exercised as the interpretation of the parameters differs from the marginal models. Data from the National Institute of Child Health & Human Development sponsored PROPHET trial are used for illustration. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:150 / 154
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Estimation of ascertainment bias and its effect on power in clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes
    Greene, Erich J.
    Peduzzi, Peter
    Dziura, James
    Meng, Can
    Miller, Michael E.
    Travison, Thomas G.
    Esserman, Denise
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2021, 40 (05) : 1306 - 1320
  • [22] Counterfactual mediation analysis in the multistate model framework for surrogate and clinical time-to-event outcomes in randomized controlled trials
    Weir, Isabelle R.
    Rider, Jennifer R.
    Trinquart, Ludovic
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2022, 21 (01) : 163 - 175
  • [23] Analysis methods for covariate-constrained cluster randomized trials with time-to-event outcomes
    Crisp, Amy M.
    Halloran, M. Elizabeth
    Hitchings, Matt D. T.
    Longini, Ira M.
    Dean, Natalie E.
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2025, 25 (01)
  • [24] Milestone prediction for time-to-event endpoint monitoring in clinical trials
    Ou, Fang-Shu
    Heller, Martin
    Shi, Qian
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2019, 18 (04) : 433 - 446
  • [25] Efficient group-sequential designs for monitoring two time-to-event outcomes in clinical trials
    Hamasaki, Toshimitsu
    Asakura, Koko
    Sugimoto, Tomoyuki
    Evans, Scott R.
    Yamamoto, Haruko
    Hsiao, Chin-Fu
    TRIALS, 2017, 18
  • [26] Projection of power and events in clinical trials with a time-to-event outcome
    Royston, Patrick
    Barthel, Friederike M-S
    STATA JOURNAL, 2010, 10 (03): : 386 - 394
  • [27] On the estimation of intracluster correlation for time-to-event outcomes in cluster randomized trials
    Kalia, Sumeet
    Klar, Neil
    Donner, Allan
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2016, 35 (30) : 5551 - 5560
  • [28] Interpretation of time-to-event outcomes in randomized trials: an online randomized experiment
    Weir, I. R.
    Marshall, G. D.
    Schneider, J. I.
    Sherer, J. A.
    Lord, E. M.
    Gyawali, B.
    Paasche-Orlow, M. K.
    Benjamin, E. J.
    Trinquart, L.
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2019, 30 (01) : 96 - 102
  • [29] Surrogate marker analysis in cancer clinical trials through time-to-event mediation techniques
    Vandenberghe, Sjouke
    Duchateau, Luc
    Slaets, Leen
    Bogaerts, Jan
    Vansteelandt, Stijn
    STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2018, 27 (11) : 3367 - 3385
  • [30] Time-to-Event Analysis
    Tolles, Juliana
    Lewis, Roger J.
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2016, 315 (10): : 1046 - 1047