Joshua Chen Y H, Fan Chunpeng, Zhao Jing
Clinical Biostatistics, Merck Research Laboratories, North Wales, Pennsylvania 19454, USA.
J Biopharm Stat. 2008;18(4):724-36. doi: 10.1080/10543400802073168.
The plasma HIV-RNA level has been used as the primary efficacy measurement in clinical trials to evaluate antiretroviral regimens in HIV-infected patients. It is measured by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays, which usually have limits of reliable quantification (LoQ). For example, the commercially available Amplicor Standard assay has a reliable range of 400-750,000 copies/mL while the Ultrasensitive assay has a range of 50-75,000 copies/mL. Values below the lower LoQ are usually reported as categorical variables such as " < 400 copies/mL" for the Standard assay and " < 50 copies/mL" for the Ultrasensitive assay. The Standard assay, which has a higher ceiling of 750,000 copies/mL, is typically used as the first tool to measure HIV-RNA levels; if a value of " < 400 copies/mL" is reported by the Standard assay, the plasma sample may be re-tested by the Ultrasensitive assay, which has a lower LoQ of 50 copies/mL, in an effort to quantify the HIV-RNA level. However, for the calculation of change from baseline in log10 HIV-RNA, which is an important efficacy endpoint, the additional data measured by the Ultrasensitive assay are usually ignored due to a lack of simple and appropriate statistical methods. The conventional approach, which only uses the Standard assay data, may result in loss of information; the naive approach, which simply replaces " < 400 copies/mL" reported by the Standard assay with corresponding Ultrasensitive assay results, may lead to a biased estimate because the two assays may have different assay variability; the likelihood-based approach, which can utilize all data from both assays, is computationally intensive and requires a large sample size, which may limit its use in practice. In this paper, we propose a simple imputation approach that, unlike the naive method, accounts for the different variability in the two assays. A simulation study is used to compare these approaches. An example from a clinical trial in HIV-infected patients is used to illustrate the proposed approach.
血浆HIV-RNA水平已被用作临床试验中的主要疗效测量指标,以评估抗逆转录病毒治疗方案对HIV感染患者的疗效。它通过聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测来测量,这种检测通常有可靠定量限(LoQ)。例如,市售的Amplicor标准检测的可靠范围为400-750,000拷贝/毫升,而超敏检测的范围为50-75,000拷贝/毫升。低于较低LoQ的值通常报告为分类变量,如标准检测为“<400拷贝/毫升”,超敏检测为“<50拷贝/毫升”。标准检测的上限较高,为750,000拷贝/毫升,通常用作测量HIV-RNA水平的首选工具;如果标准检测报告的值为“<400拷贝/毫升”,血浆样本可能会用超敏检测重新检测,其较低的LoQ为50拷贝/毫升,以便对HIV-RNA水平进行定量。然而,对于作为重要疗效终点的log10 HIV-RNA相对于基线变化的计算,由于缺乏简单合适的统计方法,超敏检测测量的额外数据通常被忽略。仅使用标准检测数据的传统方法可能会导致信息丢失;简单地用超敏检测结果替换标准检测报告的“<400拷贝/毫升”的天真方法可能会导致有偏差的估计,因为两种检测可能具有不同的检测变异性;基于似然的方法可以利用两种检测的所有数据,但计算量大且需要大样本量,这可能会限制其在实际中的应用。在本文中,我们提出了一种简单的插补方法,与天真方法不同,该方法考虑了两种检测的不同变异性。我们使用模拟研究来比较这些方法。通过一个HIV感染患者临床试验的例子来说明所提出的方法。