Cargando…

Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers

INTRODUCTION: This paper presents a study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide in clinical practice, two cancer drugs given to patients suffering from advanced prostate cancer. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: The protocol designs a comparative-effectiv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Johansson, Per, Jonéus, Paulina, Langenskiöld, Sophie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34697119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052610
_version_ 1784590364790751232
author Johansson, Per
Jonéus, Paulina
Langenskiöld, Sophie
author_facet Johansson, Per
Jonéus, Paulina
Langenskiöld, Sophie
author_sort Johansson, Per
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This paper presents a study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide in clinical practice, two cancer drugs given to patients suffering from advanced prostate cancer. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: The protocol designs a comparative-effectiveness analysis of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide. With the substantial number of covariates a two-step procedure is suggested in choosing relevant covariates in the matching design. In the first step, an exploratory factor analysis reduces the dimension of a large set of continuous covariates to nine factors. In the second step, we reduce the dimension of the covariates, interactions and second order terms for the continuous covariates using propensity score estimation. The final design makes use of a genetic matching algorithm. The study protocol provides a detailed statistical analysis plan of the analysis sample derived from the matching design. The analysis will make use of linear regression and robust inference adjusted for multisignificance testing. DISCUSSION: As in a randomised experiment the focus is on the design of the assignment to treatment. This allows the publication of this preanalysis plan before having access to outcome data. This means that the p values will be correct if the maintained assumption of uncounfoundedness is valid. Given that is p-hacking is substantial problem in empirical research, this is a substantial strength of this study. However, while design yields, balance on the observed covariates one cannot discard the possibility that unobserved confounders are not balanced. For that reason, sensitivity tests for the maintained assumption of uncounfoundedness are presented. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Uppsala, Sweden (Dnr 2017/482). Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and distributed to relevant stakeholders in healthcare.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8547362
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85473622021-10-29 Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers Johansson, Per Jonéus, Paulina Langenskiöld, Sophie BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice INTRODUCTION: This paper presents a study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide in clinical practice, two cancer drugs given to patients suffering from advanced prostate cancer. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: The protocol designs a comparative-effectiveness analysis of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide. With the substantial number of covariates a two-step procedure is suggested in choosing relevant covariates in the matching design. In the first step, an exploratory factor analysis reduces the dimension of a large set of continuous covariates to nine factors. In the second step, we reduce the dimension of the covariates, interactions and second order terms for the continuous covariates using propensity score estimation. The final design makes use of a genetic matching algorithm. The study protocol provides a detailed statistical analysis plan of the analysis sample derived from the matching design. The analysis will make use of linear regression and robust inference adjusted for multisignificance testing. DISCUSSION: As in a randomised experiment the focus is on the design of the assignment to treatment. This allows the publication of this preanalysis plan before having access to outcome data. This means that the p values will be correct if the maintained assumption of uncounfoundedness is valid. Given that is p-hacking is substantial problem in empirical research, this is a substantial strength of this study. However, while design yields, balance on the observed covariates one cannot discard the possibility that unobserved confounders are not balanced. For that reason, sensitivity tests for the maintained assumption of uncounfoundedness are presented. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Uppsala, Sweden (Dnr 2017/482). Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and distributed to relevant stakeholders in healthcare. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-10-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8547362/ /pubmed/34697119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052610 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Evidence Based Practice
Johansson, Per
Jonéus, Paulina
Langenskiöld, Sophie
Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers
title Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers
title_full Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers
title_fullStr Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers
title_full_unstemmed Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers
title_short Study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on Swedish administrative registers
title_sort study protocol for a comparative effectiveness evaluation of abiraterone acetate against enzalutamide: a longitudinal study based on swedish administrative registers
topic Evidence Based Practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8547362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34697119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052610
work_keys_str_mv AT johanssonper studyprotocolforacomparativeeffectivenessevaluationofabirateroneacetateagainstenzalutamidealongitudinalstudybasedonswedishadministrativeregisters
AT joneuspaulina studyprotocolforacomparativeeffectivenessevaluationofabirateroneacetateagainstenzalutamidealongitudinalstudybasedonswedishadministrativeregisters
AT langenskioldsophie studyprotocolforacomparativeeffectivenessevaluationofabirateroneacetateagainstenzalutamidealongitudinalstudybasedonswedishadministrativeregisters