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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |