How important is the linearity assumption in a sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial where treatment is anticipated to affect a rate of change?

被引:0
|
作者
Morgan, Katy E. [1 ]
White, Ian R. [2 ]
Frost, Chris [1 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Med Stat, London, England
[2] UCL, MRC Clin Trials Unit, London, England
关键词
Random slopes model; Linearity assumption; Sample size calculation; Randomised clinical trial; Model misspecification; CLINICAL-TRIALS; BRAIN ATROPHY; TIME; DESIGN; POWER; MS;
D O I
10.1186/s12874-023-02093-2
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
BackgroundFor certain conditions, treatments aim to lessen deterioration over time. A trial outcome could be change in a continuous measure, analysed using a random slopes model with a different slope in each treatment group. A sample size for a trial with a particular schedule of visits (e.g. annually for three years) can be obtained using a two-stage process. First, relevant (co-) variances are estimated from a pre-existing dataset e.g. an observational study conducted in a similar setting. Second, standard formulae are used to calculate sample size. However, the random slopes model assumes linear trajectories with any difference in group means increasing proportionally to follow-up time. The impact of these assumptions failing is unclear.MethodsWe used simulation to assess the impact of a non-linear trajectory and/or non-proportional treatment effect on the proposed trial's power. We used four trajectories, both linear and non-linear, and simulated observational studies to calculate sample sizes. Trials of this size were then simulated, with treatment effects proportional or non-proportional to time.ResultsFor a proportional treatment effect and a trial visit schedule matching the observational study, powers are close to nominal even for non-linear trajectories. However, if the schedule does not match the observational study, powers can be above or below nominal levels, with the extent of this depending on parameters such as the residual error variance. For a non-proportional treatment effect, using a random slopes model can lead to powers far from nominal levels.ConclusionsIf trajectories are suspected to be non-linear, observational data used to inform power calculations should have the same visit schedule as the proposed trial where possible. Additionally, if the treatment effect is expected to be non-proportional, the random slopes model should not be used. A model allowing trajectories to vary freely over time could be used instead, either as a second line analysis method (bearing in mind that power will be lost) or when powering the trial.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [1] How important is the linearity assumption in a sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial where treatment is anticipated to affect a rate of change?
    Katy E. Morgan
    Ian R. White
    Chris Frost
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 23
  • [2] Patient acceptability of larval therapy for leg ulcer treatment: A randomised survey to inform the sample size calculation of a randomised trial
    Petherick E.S.
    O'Meara S.
    Spilsbury K.
    Iglesias C.P.
    Nelson E.A.
    Torgerson D.J.
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6 (1)
  • [3] DELTA2 guidance on choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial
    Jonathan A. Cook
    Steven A. Julious
    William Sones
    Lisa V. Hampson
    Catherine Hewitt
    Jesse A. Berlin
    Deborah Ashby
    Richard Emsley
    Dean A. Fergusson
    Stephen J. Walters
    Edward C. F. Wilson
    Graeme Maclennan
    Nigel Stallard
    Joanne C. Rothwell
    Martin Bland
    Louise Brown
    Craig R. Ramsay
    Andrew Cook
    David Armstrong
    Doug Altman
    Luke D. Vale
    Trials, 19
  • [4] DELTA2 guidance on choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial
    Cook, Jonathan A.
    Julious, Steven A.
    Sones, William
    Hampson, Lisa, V
    Hewitt, Catherine
    Berlin, Jesse A.
    Ashby, Deborah
    Emsley, Richard
    Fergusson, Dean A.
    Walters, Stephen J.
    Wilson, Edward C. F.
    MacLennan, Graeme
    Stallard, Nigel
    Rothwell, Joanne C.
    Bland, Martin
    Brown, Louise
    Ramsay, Craig R.
    Cook, Andrew
    Armstrong, David
    Altman, Doug
    Vale, Luke D.
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2018, 363
  • [5] DELTA2 guidance on choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial
    Cook, Jonathan A.
    Julious, Steven A.
    Sones, William
    Hampson, Lisa V.
    Hewitt, Catherine
    Berlin, Jesse A.
    Ashby, Deborah
    Emsley, Richard
    Fergusson, Dean A.
    Walters, Stephen J.
    Wilson, Edward C. F.
    Maclennan, Graeme
    Stallard, Nigel
    Rothwell, Joanne C.
    Bland, Martin
    Brown, Louise
    Ramsay, Craig R.
    Cook, Andrew
    Armstrong, David
    Altman, Doug
    Vale, Luke D.
    TRIALS, 2018, 19
  • [6] Sample Size Calculation: Inaccurate A Priori Assumptions for Nuisance Parameters Can Greatly Affect the Power of a Randomized Controlled Trial
    Tavernier, Elsa
    Giraudeau, Bruno
    PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (07):
  • [7] Choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial – the development of the DELTA2 guidance
    William Sones
    Steven A. Julious
    Joanne C. Rothwell
    Craig Robert Ramsay
    Lisa V. Hampson
    Richard Emsley
    Stephen J. Walters
    Catherine Hewitt
    Martin Bland
    Dean A. Fergusson
    Jesse A. Berlin
    Doug Altman
    Luke David Vale
    Jonathan Alistair Cook
    Trials, 19
  • [8] Choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial - the development of the DELTA2 guidance
    Sones, William
    Julious, Steven A.
    Rothwell, Joanne C.
    Ramsay, Craig Robert
    Hampson, Lisa V.
    Emsley, Richard
    Walters, Stephen J.
    Hewitt, Catherine
    Bland, Martin
    Fergusson, Dean A.
    Berlin, Jesse A.
    Altman, Doug
    Vale, Luke David
    Cook, Jonathan Alistair
    TRIALS, 2018, 19
  • [9] Correction to: Choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial – the development of the DELTA2 guidance
    William Sones
    Steven A. Julious
    Joanne C. Rothwell
    Craig Robert Ramsay
    Lisa V. Hampson
    Richard Emsley
    Stephen J. Walters
    Catherine Hewitt
    Martin Bland
    Dean A. Fergusson
    Jesse A. Berlin
    Doug Altman
    Luke David Vale
    Jonathan Alistair Cook
    Trials, 20
  • [10] A pilot study to determine prognostic markers and to estimate sample size accrual rate for a randomised control trial in treatment of IgA nephropathy.
    Pritchard, NR
    Dey, P
    Boulton-Jones, M
    Schmitt, S
    Feehally, J
    O'Donoghue, DJ
    KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL, 1999, 55 (06) : 2569 - 2569