Liberali Gui, Boersma Eric, Lingsma Hester, Brugts Jasper, Dippel Diederik, Tijssen Jan, Hauser John
Erasmus University, Rotterdam School of Management, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Cardiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 Feb;178:111612. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111612. Epub 2024 Nov 16.
To evaluate real-time (day-to-day) adaptation of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with delayed endpoints - a "forward-looking optimal-experimentation" form of response-adaptive randomization. To identify the implied tradeoffs between lowered mortality, CIs, statistical power, potential arm misidentification, and endpoint rate change during the trial.
Using data from RCTs in acute myocardial infarction (30,732 patients in the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries, GUSTO-1) and coronary heart disease (12,218 patients in the EURopean trial On reduction of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease, EUROPA), we resample treatment-arm assignments and expected endpoints to simulate (1) real-time assignment, (2) forward-looking assignments adapted after observing a fixed number of patients ("blocks"), and (3) a variant that balances RCT and real-time assignments. Blinded real-time adaptive randomizations (RTARs) adjust day-to-day arm assignments by optimizing the tradeoff between assigning the (likely) best treatment and learning about endpoint rates for future assignments.
Despite delays in endpoints, real-time assignment quickly learns which arm is superior. In the simulations, by the end of the trials, real-time assignment allocated more patients to the superior arm and fewer patients to the inferior arm(s) resulting in less mortality over the course of the trial. Endpoint rates and odds ratios were well within (resampling) CIs of the RCTs, but with tighter CIs on the superior arm and less-tight CIs on the inferior arm(s) and the odds ratios. The variant and patient-block-based adaptation each provides intermediate levels of benefits and costs. When endpoint rates change within a trial, real-time assignment improves estimation of the end-of-trial superior-arm endpoint rates, but exaggerates differences relative to inferior arms. Unlike most response-adaptive randomizations, real-time assignment automatically adjusts to reduce biases when real changes are larger.
Real-time assignment improves patient outcomes within the trial and narrows the CI for the superior arm. Benefits are balanced with wider CIs on inferior arms and odds ratios. Forward-looking variants provide intermediate benefits and costs. In no simulations, was an inferior arm identified as statistically superior.
Randomized controlled trials (RCT) are the gold standard in clinical trials - typically half of the patients are assigned to a new drug or procedure and the other half to a placebo (or the current best option). Typically, half of the patients might get an inferior drug or treatment. We explore a method, real-time adaptive randomization (RTAR), that uses information observed up to the time of the next assignment to best allocate patients to treatments, balancing known current and unknown future outcomes-treating vs. learning. RTAR is based on a preplanned, but adaptive, assignment rule. Blinding can be maintained, so that neither the trialist nor the patient knows to which treatment the patient was assigned. During the trial, as the RTAR learns the "best" treatment, the RTAR assigns more patients to that best treatment than would a classical RCT. In two large-scale cardiovascular clinical trials, our simulations suggest that the RTAR would have saved lives while identifying the best post-trial treatment at least as well as an RCT. Some statistical measures are improved and others are worse. If endpoint rates in treatments would have changed dramatically during the trial, the RTAR would have adapted better than many other methods.
评估具有延迟终点的随机对照试验(RCT)的实时(每日)适应性——一种“前瞻性最优试验”形式的反应自适应随机化。确定在试验期间降低死亡率、置信区间、统计功效、潜在的组间误判以及终点率变化之间隐含的权衡。
利用急性心肌梗死随机对照试验(全球应用链激酶和组织型纤溶酶原激活剂治疗闭塞冠状动脉试验,GUSTO - 1,30732例患者)和冠心病(欧洲培哚普利降低稳定型冠状动脉疾病心脏事件试验,EUROPA,12218例患者)的数据,我们对治疗组分配和预期终点进行重新抽样,以模拟(1)实时分配,(2)在观察固定数量患者(“块”)后进行的前瞻性分配,以及(3)一种平衡随机对照试验和实时分配的变体。盲法实时自适应随机化(RTAR)通过优化在分配(可能)最佳治疗与了解未来分配的终点率之间的权衡来调整每日的组分配。
尽管终点存在延迟,但实时分配能迅速了解哪一组更优。在模拟中,到试验结束时,实时分配将更多患者分配到更优组,而将更少患者分配到较差组,从而在试验过程中降低了死亡率。终点率和优势比完全在随机对照试验的(重新抽样)置信区间内,但更优组的置信区间更窄,较差组的置信区间更宽,优势比也是如此。变体和基于患者块的适应性各自提供了中等水平的收益和成本。当试验期间终点率发生变化时,实时分配改善了对试验结束时更优组终点率的估计,但相对于较差组夸大了差异。与大多数反应自适应随机化不同,当实际变化较大时,实时分配会自动调整以减少偏差。
实时分配改善了试验中的患者结局,并缩小了更优组的置信区间。收益与较差组更宽的置信区间和优势比相平衡。前瞻性变体提供了中等的收益和成本。在任何模拟中,均未将较差组判定为在统计学上更优。
随机对照试验(RCT)是临床试验的金标准——通常一半患者被分配接受新药或新程序,另一半接受安慰剂(或当前最佳选择)。通常,一半患者可能会接受较差的药物或治疗。我们探索了一种方法,即实时自适应随机化(RTAR),它利用直到下一次分配时观察到的信息,以最佳方式将患者分配到治疗组,平衡已知的当前结果和未知的未来结果——治疗与学习。RTAR基于预先计划但具有适应性的分配规则。可以保持盲法,这样试验者和患者都不知道患者被分配到了哪种治疗。在试验期间,随着RTAR了解到“最佳”治疗,与传统随机对照试验相比,RTAR会将更多患者分配到该最佳治疗。在两项大型心血管临床试验中,我们的模拟表明,RTAR在识别试验后的最佳治疗方面至少与传统随机对照试验一样好的同时,还能挽救生命。一些统计指标得到改善,而另一些则变差。如果试验期间治疗的终点率发生了显著变化,RTAR的适应性将优于许多其他方法。