Desai Manisha, Pieper Karen S, Mahaffey Ken
Quantitative Sciences Unit, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, 1070 Arastradero Road #305, Palo Alto, CA, 94306, USA,
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2014;16(10):531. doi: 10.1007/s11886-014-0531-2.
Subgroup analyses are commonly performed in the clinical trial setting with the purpose of illustrating that the treatment effect was consistent across different patient characteristics or identifying characteristics that should be targeted for treatment. There are statistical issues involved in performing subgroup analyses, however. These have been given considerable attention in the literature for analyses where subgroups are defined by a pre-randomization feature. Although subgroup analyses are often performed with subgroups defined by a post-randomization feature--including analyses that estimate the treatment effect among compliers--discussion of these analyses has been neglected in the clinical literature. Such analyses pose a high risk of presenting biased descriptions of treatment effects. We summarize the challenges of doing all types of subgroup analyses described in the literature. In particular, we emphasize issues with post-randomization subgroup analyses. Finally, we provide guidelines on how to proceed across the spectrum of subgroup analyses.
亚组分析在临床试验中经常进行,目的是说明治疗效果在不同患者特征中是一致的,或者识别应作为治疗靶点的特征。然而,进行亚组分析涉及统计学问题。对于根据随机分组前特征定义亚组的分析,这些问题在文献中已得到相当多的关注。尽管亚组分析通常是根据随机分组后特征定义亚组进行的——包括估计依从者中的治疗效果的分析——但这些分析在临床文献中却被忽视了。此类分析存在呈现治疗效果偏差描述的高风险。我们总结了文献中描述的各类亚组分析所面临的挑战。特别是,我们强调随机分组后亚组分析的问题。最后,我们提供了关于如何进行亚组分析全范围操作的指南。