Cargando…

Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling

BACKGROUND: Inter-observer variability in stroke aetiological classification may have an effect on trial power and estimation of treatment effect. We modelled the effect of misclassification on required sample size in a hypothetical cardioembolic (CE) stroke trial. METHODS: We performed a systematic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abdul-Rahim, Azmil H., Dickie, David Alexander, Selvarajah, Johann R., Lees, Kennedy R., Quinn, Terence J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6368715/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30736833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3222-x
_version_ 1783394043856683008
author Abdul-Rahim, Azmil H.
Dickie, David Alexander
Selvarajah, Johann R.
Lees, Kennedy R.
Quinn, Terence J.
author_facet Abdul-Rahim, Azmil H.
Dickie, David Alexander
Selvarajah, Johann R.
Lees, Kennedy R.
Quinn, Terence J.
author_sort Abdul-Rahim, Azmil H.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Inter-observer variability in stroke aetiological classification may have an effect on trial power and estimation of treatment effect. We modelled the effect of misclassification on required sample size in a hypothetical cardioembolic (CE) stroke trial. METHODS: We performed a systematic review to quantify the reliability (inter-observer variability) of various stroke aetiological classification systems. We then modelled the effect of this misclassification in a hypothetical trial of anticoagulant in CE stroke contaminated by patients with non-cardioembolic (non-CE) stroke aetiology. Rates of misclassification were based on the summary reliability estimates from our systematic review. We randomly sampled data from previous acute trials in CE and non-CE participants, using the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive. We used bootstrapping to model the effect of varying misclassification rates on sample size required to detect a between-group treatment effect across 5000 permutations. We described outcomes in terms of survival and stroke recurrence censored at 90 days. RESULTS: From 4655 titles, we found 14 articles describing three stroke classification systems. The inter-observer reliability of the classification systems varied from ‘fair’ to ‘very good’ and suggested misclassification rates of 5% and 20% for our modelling. The hypothetical trial, with 80% power and alpha 0.05, was able to show a difference in survival between anticoagulant and antiplatelet in CE with a sample size of 198 in both trial arms. Contamination of both arms with 5% misclassified participants inflated the required sample size to 237 and with 20% misclassification inflated the required sample size to 352, for equivalent trial power. For an outcome of stroke recurrence using the same data, base-case estimated sample size for 80% power and alpha 0.05 was n = 502 in each arm, increasing to 605 at 5% contamination and 973 at 20% contamination. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke aetiological classification systems suffer from inter-observer variability, and the resulting misclassification may limit trial power. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Protocol available at reviewregistry540. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3222-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6368715
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63687152019-02-15 Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling Abdul-Rahim, Azmil H. Dickie, David Alexander Selvarajah, Johann R. Lees, Kennedy R. Quinn, Terence J. Trials Research BACKGROUND: Inter-observer variability in stroke aetiological classification may have an effect on trial power and estimation of treatment effect. We modelled the effect of misclassification on required sample size in a hypothetical cardioembolic (CE) stroke trial. METHODS: We performed a systematic review to quantify the reliability (inter-observer variability) of various stroke aetiological classification systems. We then modelled the effect of this misclassification in a hypothetical trial of anticoagulant in CE stroke contaminated by patients with non-cardioembolic (non-CE) stroke aetiology. Rates of misclassification were based on the summary reliability estimates from our systematic review. We randomly sampled data from previous acute trials in CE and non-CE participants, using the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive. We used bootstrapping to model the effect of varying misclassification rates on sample size required to detect a between-group treatment effect across 5000 permutations. We described outcomes in terms of survival and stroke recurrence censored at 90 days. RESULTS: From 4655 titles, we found 14 articles describing three stroke classification systems. The inter-observer reliability of the classification systems varied from ‘fair’ to ‘very good’ and suggested misclassification rates of 5% and 20% for our modelling. The hypothetical trial, with 80% power and alpha 0.05, was able to show a difference in survival between anticoagulant and antiplatelet in CE with a sample size of 198 in both trial arms. Contamination of both arms with 5% misclassified participants inflated the required sample size to 237 and with 20% misclassification inflated the required sample size to 352, for equivalent trial power. For an outcome of stroke recurrence using the same data, base-case estimated sample size for 80% power and alpha 0.05 was n = 502 in each arm, increasing to 605 at 5% contamination and 973 at 20% contamination. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke aetiological classification systems suffer from inter-observer variability, and the resulting misclassification may limit trial power. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Protocol available at reviewregistry540. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3222-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6368715/ /pubmed/30736833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3222-x Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Abdul-Rahim, Azmil H.
Dickie, David Alexander
Selvarajah, Johann R.
Lees, Kennedy R.
Quinn, Terence J.
Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling
title Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling
title_full Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling
title_fullStr Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling
title_full_unstemmed Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling
title_short Stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling
title_sort stroke aetiological classification reliability and effect on trial sample size: systematic review, meta-analysis and statistical modelling
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6368715/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30736833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3222-x
work_keys_str_mv AT abdulrahimazmilh strokeaetiologicalclassificationreliabilityandeffectontrialsamplesizesystematicreviewmetaanalysisandstatisticalmodelling
AT dickiedavidalexander strokeaetiologicalclassificationreliabilityandeffectontrialsamplesizesystematicreviewmetaanalysisandstatisticalmodelling
AT selvarajahjohannr strokeaetiologicalclassificationreliabilityandeffectontrialsamplesizesystematicreviewmetaanalysisandstatisticalmodelling
AT leeskennedyr strokeaetiologicalclassificationreliabilityandeffectontrialsamplesizesystematicreviewmetaanalysisandstatisticalmodelling
AT quinnterencej strokeaetiologicalclassificationreliabilityandeffectontrialsamplesizesystematicreviewmetaanalysisandstatisticalmodelling
AT strokeaetiologicalclassificationreliabilityandeffectontrialsamplesizesystematicreviewmetaanalysisandstatisticalmodelling