Design and analysis of factorial clinical trials: The impact of one treatment's effectiveness on the statistical power and required sample size of the other

被引:2
|
作者
Walter, Stephen D. D. [1 ]
Belo, Ian J. J. [2 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methods Evidence & Impact, CRL233, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Dept Math & Stat, Hamilton, ON, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Factorial studies; power; sample size; clinical trials; study design;
D O I
10.1177/09622802231163332
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Factorial trials allow for the simultaneous evaluation of more than one treatment, by randomizing patients to their possible combinations, including control. However, the statistical power of one treatment can be influenced by the effectiveness of the other, a matter that has not been widely recognized. In this paper, we evaluate the relationship between the observed effectiveness of one treatment and the implied power for a second treatment in the same trial, under a range of conditions. We provide analytic and numerical solutions for a binary outcome, under the additive, multiplicative, and odds ratio scales for treatment interaction. We demonstrate how the minimum required sample size for a trial depends on the two treatment effects. Relevant factors include the event rate in the control group, sample size, treatment effect sizes, and Type-I error rate thresholds. We show that that power for one treatment decreases as a function of the observed effectiveness of the other treatment if there is no multiplicative interaction. A similar pattern is observed with the odds ratio scale at low control rates, but at high control rates, power may increase if the first treatment is moderately more effective than its planned value. When treatments do not interact additively, power may either increase or decrease, depending on the control event rate. We also determine where the maximum power occurs for the second treatment. We illustrate these ideas with data from two actual factorial trials. These results can benefit investigators in planning the analysis of factorial clinical trials, in particular, to alert them to the potential for losses in power when one observed treatment effect differs from its originally postulated value. Updating the power calculation and modifying the associated required sample size can then ensure sufficient power for both treatments.
引用
收藏
页码:1124 / 1144
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The impact of lowering the study design significance threshold to 0.005 on sample size in randomized cancer clinical trials
    Leung, Tiffany H.
    Ho, James C.
    Wang, Xiaofei
    Lam, Wendy W.
    Pang, Herbert H.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE, 2023, 8 (01)
  • [23] Exact and Approximate Power and Sample Size Calculations for Analysis of Covariance in Randomized Clinical Trials With or Without Stratification
    Tang, Yongqiang
    STATISTICS IN BIOPHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH, 2018, 10 (04): : 274 - 286
  • [24] Missing data and sensitivity analysis for binary data with implications for sample size and power of randomized clinical trials
    Cook, Thomas
    Zea, Ryan
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2020, 39 (02) : 192 - 204
  • [25] Statistical analysis, trial design and duration in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: a review
    Thompson, P. A.
    Wright, D. E.
    Counsell, C. E.
    Zajicek, J.
    INTERNATIONAL PSYCHOGERIATRICS, 2012, 24 (05) : 689 - 697
  • [26] Use of Randomised Controlled Trials for Producing Cost-Effectiveness EvidencePotential Impact of Design Choices on Sample Size and Study Duration
    Martin E. Backhouse
    PharmacoEconomics, 2002, 20 : 1061 - 1077
  • [27] Demystifying sample-size calculation for clinical trials and comparative effectiveness research: the impact of low-event frequency in surgical clinical research
    Chang, David C.
    Yu, Peter T.
    Easterlin, Molly C.
    Talamini, Mark A.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2013, 27 (02): : 359 - 363
  • [28] Demystifying sample-size calculation for clinical trials and comparative effectiveness research: the impact of low-event frequency in surgical clinical research
    David C. Chang
    Peter T. Yu
    Molly C. Easterlin
    Mark A. Talamini
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2013, 27 : 359 - 363
  • [29] Design of clinical cardioprotection trials using CMR: impact of myocardial salvage index and a narrow inclusion window on sample size
    Henrik Engblom
    Einar Heiberg
    Svend Eggert Jensen
    Jan Erik Nordrehaug
    Jean-Luc Dubois-Randé
    Sigrun Halvorsen
    Sasha Koul
    David Erlinge
    Dan Atar
    Marcus Carlsson
    Håkan Arheden
    Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 17 (Suppl 1)
  • [30] Statistical power of clinical trials increased while effect size remained stable: an empirical analysis of 136,212 clinical trials between 1975 and 2014
    Lamberink, Herm J.
    Otte, Willem M.
    Sinke, Michel R. T.
    Lakens, Daniel
    Glasziou, Paul P.
    Tijdink, Joeri K.
    Vinkers, Christiaan H.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2018, 102 : 123 - 128