Brentnall Adam R, Sasieni Peter, Cuzick Jack
Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse square, London, EC1M 6BQ, U.K.
Stat Med. 2017 Jul 10;36(15):2333-2346. doi: 10.1002/sim.7275. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
When one arm in a trial has a worse early endpoint such as recurrence, a data-monitoring committee might recommend that all participants are offered the apparently superior treatment. The resultant crossover makes it difficult to measure differences between arms thereafter, including for longer-term endpoints such as mortality and disease-specific mortality. In this paper, we consider estimators of the efficacy of treatment on those who would not cross over if randomised to the apparently inferior arm. Binomial and proportional hazards maximum likelihood estimators are developed. The binomial estimator is applied to analysis of a breast cancer treatment trial and compared with intention-to-treat and inverse probability weighting estimators. Full and partial likelihood proportional-hazard model estimators are assessed through computer simulations, where they had similar bias and variance. The new efficacy estimators extend those for all-or-none compliance to this important problem. © 2017 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
当一项试验中的一组出现更差的早期终点,如复发时,数据监测委员会可能会建议为所有参与者提供明显更优的治疗。由此产生的交叉情况使得此后难以衡量两组之间的差异,包括对于死亡率和疾病特异性死亡率等长期终点。在本文中,我们考虑对那些如果被随机分配到明显较差的组就不会交叉的人群进行治疗效果的估计。我们开发了二项式和比例风险最大似然估计器。将二项式估计器应用于一项乳腺癌治疗试验的分析,并与意向性治疗和逆概率加权估计器进行比较。通过计算机模拟评估了全似然和偏似然比例风险模型估计器,它们具有相似的偏差和方差。新的疗效估计器将全或无依从性的估计器扩展到了这个重要问题上。© 2017作者。《医学统计学》由约翰·威利父子有限公司出版。