1 Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands.
2 Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Technology University Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 Sep;27(9):2872-2882. doi: 10.1177/0962280216689280. Epub 2017 Jan 26.
Clinical trials may apply or use a sequential introduction of a new treatment to determine its efficacy or effectiveness with respect to a control treatment. The reasons for choosing a particular switch design have different origins. For instance, they may be implemented for ethical or logistic reasons or for studying disease-modifying effects. Large-scale pragmatic trials with complex interventions often use stepped wedge designs (SWDs), where all participants start at the control group, and during the trial, the control treatment is switched to the new intervention at different moments. They typically use cross-sectional data and cluster randomization. On the other hand, new drugs for inhibition of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's or Parkinson's disease typically use delayed start designs (DSDs). Here, participants start in a parallel group design and at a certain moment in the trial, (part of) the control group switches to the new treatment. The studies are longitudinal in nature, and individuals are being randomized. Statistical methods for these unidirectional switch designs (USD) are quite complex and incomparable, and they have been developed by various authors under different terminologies, model specifications, and assumptions. This imposes unnecessary barriers for researchers to compare results or choose the most appropriate method for their own needs. This paper provides an overview of past and current statistical developments for the USDs (SWD and DSD). All designs are formulated in a unified framework of treatment patterns to make comparisons between switch designs easier. The focus is primarily on statistical models, methods of estimation, sample size calculation, and optimal designs for estimation of the treatment effect. Other relevant open issues are being discussed as well to provide suggestions for future research in USDs.
临床试验可能会应用或采用新治疗方法的序贯引入,以确定其相对于对照治疗的疗效或有效性。选择特定切换设计的原因有不同的来源。例如,它们可能是出于伦理或后勤原因或研究疾病修饰作用而实施的。对于具有复杂干预措施的大规模实用试验,通常使用阶梯式楔形设计(SWD),其中所有参与者都从对照组开始,在试验过程中,对照治疗在不同时间切换为新干预措施。它们通常使用横截面数据和聚类随机化。另一方面,用于抑制阿尔茨海默病或帕金森病认知能力下降的新药通常使用延迟启动设计(DSD)。在这里,参与者开始在平行组设计中,在试验的某个时刻,(部分)对照组切换到新的治疗方法。这些研究本质上是纵向的,个体被随机分配。这些单向切换设计(USD)的统计方法非常复杂且不可比,不同作者在不同的术语、模型规范和假设下对其进行了开发。这为研究人员比较结果或为满足自身需求选择最合适的方法设置了不必要的障碍。本文提供了 USD(SWD 和 DSD)过去和当前统计发展的概述。所有设计都在治疗模式的统一框架中制定,以便更容易在切换设计之间进行比较。重点主要是统计模型、估计方法、样本量计算以及用于估计治疗效果的最优设计。还讨论了其他相关的未决问题,以提供 USD 未来研究的建议。