Cargando…

Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints

Mixed outcome endpoints that combine multiple continuous and discrete components are often employed as primary outcome measures in clinical trials. These may be in the form of co‐primary endpoints, which conclude effectiveness overall if an effect occurs in all of the components, or multiple primary...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McMenamin, Martina E., Barrett, Jessica K., Berglind, Anna, Wason, James M. 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/PMC7612654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35199380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.9356
_version_ 1783605394922274816
author McMenamin, Martina E.
Barrett, Jessica K.
Berglind, Anna
Wason, James M. S.
author_facet McMenamin, Martina E.
Barrett, Jessica K.
Berglind, Anna
Wason, James M. S.
author_sort McMenamin, Martina E.
collection PubMed
description Mixed outcome endpoints that combine multiple continuous and discrete components are often employed as primary outcome measures in clinical trials. These may be in the form of co‐primary endpoints, which conclude effectiveness overall if an effect occurs in all of the components, or multiple primary endpoints, which require an effect in at least one of the components. Alternatively, they may be combined to form composite endpoints, which reduce the outcomes to a one‐dimensional endpoint. There are many advantages to joint modeling the individual outcomes, however in order to do this in practice we require techniques for sample size estimation. In this article we show how the latent variable model can be used to estimate the joint endpoints and propose hypotheses, power calculations and sample size estimation methods for each. We illustrate the techniques using a numerical example based on a four‐dimensional endpoint and find that the sample size required for the co‐primary endpoint is larger than that required for the individual endpoint with the smallest effect size. Conversely, the sample size required in the multiple primary case is similar to that needed for the outcome with the largest effect size. We show that the empirical power is achieved for each endpoint and that the FWER can be sufficiently controlled using a Bonferroni correction if the correlations between endpoints are less than 0.5. Otherwise, less conservative adjustments may be needed. We further illustrate empirically the efficiency gains that may be achieved in the composite endpoint setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7612654
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76126542022-06-15 Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints McMenamin, Martina E. Barrett, Jessica K. Berglind, Anna Wason, James M. S. Stat Med Research Articles Mixed outcome endpoints that combine multiple continuous and discrete components are often employed as primary outcome measures in clinical trials. These may be in the form of co‐primary endpoints, which conclude effectiveness overall if an effect occurs in all of the components, or multiple primary endpoints, which require an effect in at least one of the components. Alternatively, they may be combined to form composite endpoints, which reduce the outcomes to a one‐dimensional endpoint. There are many advantages to joint modeling the individual outcomes, however in order to do this in practice we require techniques for sample size estimation. In this article we show how the latent variable model can be used to estimate the joint endpoints and propose hypotheses, power calculations and sample size estimation methods for each. We illustrate the techniques using a numerical example based on a four‐dimensional endpoint and find that the sample size required for the co‐primary endpoint is larger than that required for the individual endpoint with the smallest effect size. Conversely, the sample size required in the multiple primary case is similar to that needed for the outcome with the largest effect size. We show that the empirical power is achieved for each endpoint and that the FWER can be sufficiently controlled using a Bonferroni correction if the correlations between endpoints are less than 0.5. Otherwise, less conservative adjustments may be needed. We further illustrate empirically the efficiency gains that may be achieved in the composite endpoint setting. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-02-23 2022-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7612654/ /pubmed/35199380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.9356 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
McMenamin, Martina E.
Barrett, Jessica K.
Berglind, Anna
Wason, James M. S.
Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints
title Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints
title_full Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints
title_fullStr Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints
title_full_unstemmed Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints
title_short Sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints
title_sort sample size estimation using a latent variable model for mixed outcome co‐primary, multiple primary and composite endpoints
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7612654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35199380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.9356
work_keys_str_mv AT mcmenaminmartinae samplesizeestimationusingalatentvariablemodelformixedoutcomecoprimarymultipleprimaryandcompositeendpoints
AT barrettjessicak samplesizeestimationusingalatentvariablemodelformixedoutcomecoprimarymultipleprimaryandcompositeendpoints
AT berglindanna samplesizeestimationusingalatentvariablemodelformixedoutcomecoprimarymultipleprimaryandcompositeendpoints
AT wasonjamesms samplesizeestimationusingalatentvariablemodelformixedoutcomecoprimarymultipleprimaryandcompositeendpoints