Latimer Nicholas R, Henshall Chris, Siebert Uwe, Bell Helen
School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR),University of
Brunel University London.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016 Jan;32(3):160-6. doi: 10.1017/S026646231600026X.
Treatment switching refers to the situation in a randomized controlled trial where patients switch from their randomly assigned treatment onto an alternative. Often, switching is from the control group onto the experimental treatment. In this instance, a standard intention-to-treat analysis does not identify the true comparative effectiveness of the treatments under investigation. We aim to describe statistical methods for adjusting for treatment switching in a comprehensible way for nonstatisticians, and to summarize views on these methods expressed by stakeholders at the 2014 Adelaide International Workshop on Treatment Switching in Clinical Trials.
We describe three statistical methods used to adjust for treatment switching: marginal structural models, two-stage adjustment, and rank preserving structural failure time models. We draw upon discussion heard at the Adelaide International Workshop to explore the views of stakeholders on the acceptability of these methods.
Stakeholders noted that adjustment methods are based on assumptions, the validity of which may often be questionable. There was disagreement on the acceptability of adjustment methods, but consensus that when these are used, they should be justified rigorously. The utility of adjustment methods depends upon the decision being made and the processes used by the decision-maker.
Treatment switching makes estimating the true comparative effect of a new treatment challenging. However, many decision-makers have reservations with adjustment methods. These, and how they affect the utility of adjustment methods, require further exploration. Further technical work is required to develop adjustment methods to meet real world needs, to enhance their acceptability to decision-makers.
治疗转换是指在随机对照试验中患者从随机分配的治疗方案转换为另一种方案的情况。通常,转换是从对照组转换为试验性治疗。在这种情况下,标准的意向性分析无法确定所研究治疗的真正比较效果。我们旨在以一种非统计人员能够理解的方式描述用于调整治疗转换的统计方法,并总结利益相关者在2014年阿德莱德临床试验治疗转换国际研讨会上对这些方法表达的观点。
我们描述了三种用于调整治疗转换的统计方法:边际结构模型、两阶段调整和秩保持结构失效时间模型。我们借鉴在阿德莱德国际研讨会上听到的讨论,探讨利益相关者对这些方法可接受性的看法。
利益相关者指出,调整方法基于假设,而这些假设的有效性往往值得怀疑。对于调整方法的可接受性存在分歧,但达成的共识是,当使用这些方法时,应进行严格的论证。调整方法的效用取决于所做的决策以及决策者使用的流程。
治疗转换使得估计新治疗的真正比较效果具有挑战性。然而,许多决策者对调整方法有所保留。这些问题以及它们如何影响调整方法的效用,需要进一步探索。需要开展进一步的技术工作来开发调整方法,以满足现实世界的需求,提高决策者对它们的接受度。