Cargando…
Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study
BACKGROUND: The sample size calculation in a confirmatory diagnostic accuracy study is performed for co-primary endpoints because sensitivity and specificity are considered simultaneously. The initial sample size calculation in an unpaired and paired diagnostic study is based on assumptions about, a...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9019976/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35439947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01564-2 |
_version_ | 1784689423293612032 |
---|---|
author | Stark, Maria Hesse, Mailin Brannath, Werner Zapf, Antonia |
author_facet | Stark, Maria Hesse, Mailin Brannath, Werner Zapf, Antonia |
author_sort | Stark, Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The sample size calculation in a confirmatory diagnostic accuracy study is performed for co-primary endpoints because sensitivity and specificity are considered simultaneously. The initial sample size calculation in an unpaired and paired diagnostic study is based on assumptions about, among others, the prevalence of the disease and, in the paired design, the proportion of discordant test results between the experimental and the comparator test. The choice of the power for the individual endpoints impacts the sample size and overall power. Uncertain assumptions about the nuisance parameters can additionally affect the sample size. METHODS: We develop an optimal sample size calculation considering co-primary endpoints to avoid an overpowered study in the unpaired and paired design. To adjust assumptions about the nuisance parameters during the study period, we introduce a blinded adaptive design for sample size re-estimation for the unpaired and the paired study design. A simulation study compares the adaptive design to the fixed design. For the paired design, the new approach is compared to an existing approach using an example study. RESULTS: Due to blinding, the adaptive design does not inflate type I error rates. The adaptive design reaches the target power and re-estimates nuisance parameters without any relevant bias. Compared to the existing approach, the proposed methods lead to a smaller sample size. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the application of the optimal sample size calculation and a blinded adaptive design in a confirmatory diagnostic accuracy study. They compensate inefficiencies of the sample size calculation and support to reach the study aim. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01564-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9019976 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90199762022-04-21 Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study Stark, Maria Hesse, Mailin Brannath, Werner Zapf, Antonia BMC Med Res Methodol Research BACKGROUND: The sample size calculation in a confirmatory diagnostic accuracy study is performed for co-primary endpoints because sensitivity and specificity are considered simultaneously. The initial sample size calculation in an unpaired and paired diagnostic study is based on assumptions about, among others, the prevalence of the disease and, in the paired design, the proportion of discordant test results between the experimental and the comparator test. The choice of the power for the individual endpoints impacts the sample size and overall power. Uncertain assumptions about the nuisance parameters can additionally affect the sample size. METHODS: We develop an optimal sample size calculation considering co-primary endpoints to avoid an overpowered study in the unpaired and paired design. To adjust assumptions about the nuisance parameters during the study period, we introduce a blinded adaptive design for sample size re-estimation for the unpaired and the paired study design. A simulation study compares the adaptive design to the fixed design. For the paired design, the new approach is compared to an existing approach using an example study. RESULTS: Due to blinding, the adaptive design does not inflate type I error rates. The adaptive design reaches the target power and re-estimates nuisance parameters without any relevant bias. Compared to the existing approach, the proposed methods lead to a smaller sample size. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the application of the optimal sample size calculation and a blinded adaptive design in a confirmatory diagnostic accuracy study. They compensate inefficiencies of the sample size calculation and support to reach the study aim. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01564-2. BioMed Central 2022-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9019976/ /pubmed/35439947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01564-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Stark, Maria Hesse, Mailin Brannath, Werner Zapf, Antonia Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study |
title | Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study |
title_full | Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study |
title_fullStr | Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study |
title_full_unstemmed | Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study |
title_short | Blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study |
title_sort | blinded sample size re-estimation in a comparative diagnostic accuracy study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9019976/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35439947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01564-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT starkmaria blindedsamplesizereestimationinacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudy AT hessemailin blindedsamplesizereestimationinacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudy AT brannathwerner blindedsamplesizereestimationinacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudy AT zapfantonia blindedsamplesizereestimationinacomparativediagnosticaccuracystudy |