Cargando…
Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data
Introduction. Patient-level simulation models facilitate extrapolation of clinical trial data while allowing for heterogeneity, prior history, and nonlinearity. However, combining different types of uncertainty around within-trial and extrapolated results remains challenging. Methods. We tested 4 me...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323001/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32431211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X20916442 |
_version_ | 1783551745174011904 |
---|---|
author | Dakin, Helen A. Leal, José Briggs, Andrew Clarke, Philip Holman, Rury R. Gray, Alastair |
author_facet | Dakin, Helen A. Leal, José Briggs, Andrew Clarke, Philip Holman, Rury R. Gray, Alastair |
author_sort | Dakin, Helen A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Introduction. Patient-level simulation models facilitate extrapolation of clinical trial data while allowing for heterogeneity, prior history, and nonlinearity. However, combining different types of uncertainty around within-trial and extrapolated results remains challenging. Methods. We tested 4 methods to combine parameter uncertainty (around the regression coefficients used to predict future events) with sampling uncertainty (uncertainty around mean risk factors within the finite sample whose outcomes are being predicted and the effect of treatment on these risk factors). We compared these 4 methods using a simulation study based on an economic evaluation extrapolating the AFORRD randomized controlled trial using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model version 2. This established type 2 diabetes model predicts patient-level health outcomes and costs. Results. The 95% confidence intervals around life years gained gave 25% coverage when sampling uncertainty was excluded (i.e., 25% of 95% confidence intervals contained the “true” value). Allowing for sampling uncertainty as well as parameter uncertainty widened confidence intervals by 6.3-fold and gave 96.3% coverage. Methods adjusting for baseline risk factors that combine sampling and parameter uncertainty overcame the bias that can result from between-group baseline imbalance and gave confidence intervals around 50% wider than those just considering parameter uncertainty, with 99.8% coverage. Conclusions. Analyses extrapolating data for individual trial participants should include both sampling uncertainty and parameter uncertainty and should adjust for any imbalance in baseline covariates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7323001 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73230012020-07-09 Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data Dakin, Helen A. Leal, José Briggs, Andrew Clarke, Philip Holman, Rury R. Gray, Alastair Med Decis Making Original Articles Introduction. Patient-level simulation models facilitate extrapolation of clinical trial data while allowing for heterogeneity, prior history, and nonlinearity. However, combining different types of uncertainty around within-trial and extrapolated results remains challenging. Methods. We tested 4 methods to combine parameter uncertainty (around the regression coefficients used to predict future events) with sampling uncertainty (uncertainty around mean risk factors within the finite sample whose outcomes are being predicted and the effect of treatment on these risk factors). We compared these 4 methods using a simulation study based on an economic evaluation extrapolating the AFORRD randomized controlled trial using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model version 2. This established type 2 diabetes model predicts patient-level health outcomes and costs. Results. The 95% confidence intervals around life years gained gave 25% coverage when sampling uncertainty was excluded (i.e., 25% of 95% confidence intervals contained the “true” value). Allowing for sampling uncertainty as well as parameter uncertainty widened confidence intervals by 6.3-fold and gave 96.3% coverage. Methods adjusting for baseline risk factors that combine sampling and parameter uncertainty overcame the bias that can result from between-group baseline imbalance and gave confidence intervals around 50% wider than those just considering parameter uncertainty, with 99.8% coverage. Conclusions. Analyses extrapolating data for individual trial participants should include both sampling uncertainty and parameter uncertainty and should adjust for any imbalance in baseline covariates. SAGE Publications 2020-05-20 2020-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7323001/ /pubmed/32431211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X20916442 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Dakin, Helen A. Leal, José Briggs, Andrew Clarke, Philip Holman, Rury R. Gray, Alastair Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data |
title | Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data |
title_full | Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data |
title_fullStr | Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data |
title_full_unstemmed | Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data |
title_short | Accurately Reflecting Uncertainty When Using Patient-Level Simulation Models to Extrapolate Clinical Trial Data |
title_sort | accurately reflecting uncertainty when using patient-level simulation models to extrapolate clinical trial data |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7323001/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32431211 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X20916442 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dakinhelena accuratelyreflectinguncertaintywhenusingpatientlevelsimulationmodelstoextrapolateclinicaltrialdata AT lealjose accuratelyreflectinguncertaintywhenusingpatientlevelsimulationmodelstoextrapolateclinicaltrialdata AT briggsandrew accuratelyreflectinguncertaintywhenusingpatientlevelsimulationmodelstoextrapolateclinicaltrialdata AT clarkephilip accuratelyreflectinguncertaintywhenusingpatientlevelsimulationmodelstoextrapolateclinicaltrialdata AT holmanruryr accuratelyreflectinguncertaintywhenusingpatientlevelsimulationmodelstoextrapolateclinicaltrialdata AT grayalastair accuratelyreflectinguncertaintywhenusingpatientlevelsimulationmodelstoextrapolateclinicaltrialdata |