Cargando…

Response adaptive intervention allocation in stepped‐wedge cluster randomized trials

BACKGROUND: Stepped‐wedge cluster randomized trial (SW‐CRT) designs are often used when there is a desire to provide an intervention to all enrolled clusters, because of a belief that it will be effective. However, given there should be equipoise at trial commencement, there has been discussion arou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grayling, Michael J., Wason, James M. S., Villar, Sofía S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7612601/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35064595
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.9317
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Stepped‐wedge cluster randomized trial (SW‐CRT) designs are often used when there is a desire to provide an intervention to all enrolled clusters, because of a belief that it will be effective. However, given there should be equipoise at trial commencement, there has been discussion around whether a pre‐trial decision to provide the intervention to all clusters is appropriate. In pharmaceutical drug development, a solution to a similar desire to provide more patients with an effective treatment is to use a response adaptive (RA) design. METHODS: We introduce a way in which RA design could be incorporated in an SW‐CRT, permitting modification of the intervention allocation during the trial. The proposed framework explicitly permits a balance to be sought between power and patient benefit considerations. A simulation study evaluates the methodology. RESULTS: In one scenario, for one particular RA design, the proportion of cluster‐periods spent in the intervention condition was observed to increase from 32.2% to 67.9% as the intervention effect was increased. A cost of this was a 6.2% power drop compared to a design that maximized power by fixing the proportion of time in the intervention condition at 45.0%, regardless of the intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: An RA approach may be most applicable to settings for which the intervention has substantial individual or societal benefit considerations, potentially in combination with notable safety concerns. In such a setting, the proposed methodology may routinely provide the desired adaptability of the roll‐out speed, with only a small cost to the study's power.