Simultaneous Inference of Multiple Binary Endpoints in Biomedical Research: Small Sample Properties of Multiple Marginal Models and a Resampling Approach.

In biomedical research, the simultaneous inference of multiple binary endpoints may be of interest. In such cases, an appropriate multiplicity adjustment is required that controls the family-wise error rate, which represents the probability of making incorrect test decisions. In this paper, we investigate two approaches that perform single-step p $p$ -value adjustments that also take into account the possible correlation between endpoints. A rather novel and flexible approach known as multiple marginal models is considered, which is based on stacking of the parameter estimates of the marginal models and deriving their joint asymptotic distribution. We also investigate a nonparametric vector-based resampling approach, and we compare both approaches with the Bonferroni method by examining the family-wise error rate and power for different parameter settings, including low proportions and small sample sizes. The results show that the resampling-based approach consistently outperforms the other methods in terms of power, while still controlling the family-wise error rate. The multiple marginal models approach, on the other hand, shows a more conservative behavior. However, it offers more versatility in application, allowing for more complex models or straightforward computation of simultaneous confidence intervals. The practical application of the methods is demonstrated using a toxicological dataset from the National Toxicology Program.

Endpoints for Pharmacotherapy Trials for Alcohol Use Disorder.

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a debilitating disorder, yet currently approved pharmacotherapies to treat AUD are under-utilized. The three medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the indication of AUD are disulfiram, acamprosate, and naltrexone. The current landscape of pharmacotherapies for AUD suggests opportunities for improvement. Clinical trials investigating novel pharmacotherapies for AUD traditionally use abstinence-based drinking outcomes or no heavy drinking days as trial endpoints to determine the efficacy of pharmacotherapies. These outcomes are typically measured through patient self-report endorsements of their drinking. Apart from these traditional outcomes, there have been recent developments in novel endpoints for AUD pharmacotherapies. These novel endpoints include utilizing the World Health Organization (WHO) risk drinking level reductions to promote a harm-reduction endpoint rather than an abstinence-based endpoint. Additionally, in contrast to patient self-report measurements, biological markers of alcohol use may serve as objective endpoints in AUD pharmacotherapy trials. Lastly, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) definition of recovery from AUD and patient-oriented outcomes offer new frameworks to consider endpoints associated with more than alcohol consumption itself, such as the provider-patient experiences with novel pharmacotherapies. These recent developments in new endpoints for AUD pharmacotherapies offer promising future opportunities for pharmacotherapy development, so long as validity and reliability measures are demonstrated for the endpoints. A greater breadth of endpoint utilization may better capture the complexity of AUD symptomatology.

Role of central endpoint adjudication and challenges in trials on neonatal sepsis-a case of ProSPoNS trial.

Despite progress in reducing the infant mortality in India, the neonatal mortality decline has been slower, necessitating concerted efforts to achieve Sustainable Development Goal-3. A promising strategy aiming to prevent neonatal sepsis in high-risk, vulnerable, low birth weight neonates through an innovative intervention includes probiotic supplementation. This article communicates the decision by the ProSPoNS trial investigators to establish a Central Endpoint Adjudication Committee (CEAC) as an addendum to the protocol published in Trials in 2021 for the purpose of clarifying the primary outcome. In the published protocol, the study hypothesis and primary objective are based on "sepsis," the primary outcome has been specified as sepsis/PSBI, whereas the sample size estimation was performed based on the "physician diagnosed sepsis." To align all the three above, the investigators meeting, held on 17th-18th August 2023, at MGIMS Sevagram, Wardha, deliberated and unanimously agreed that "physician diagnosed sepsis" is the primary study outcome which includes sepsis/PSBI. The CEAC, chaired by an external subject expert and members including trial statistician, a microbiologist, and all site principal investigators will employ four criteria to determine "physician diagnosed sepsis": (1) blood culture status, (2) sepsis screen status, (3) PSBI/non-PSBI signs and symptoms, and (4) the clinical course for each sickness event. Importantly, this clarification maintains consistency with the approved study protocol (Protocol No. 5/7/915/2012 version 3.1 dated 14 Feb 2020), emphasizing the commitment to methodological transparency and adherence to predefined standards. The decision to utilize the guidance of a CEAC is recommended as the gold standard in multicentric complex clinical trials to achieve consistency and accuracy in assessment of outcomes.Trial registrationClinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI) CTRI/2019/05/019197. Registered on 16 May 2019.

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for clinical trials in primary sclerosing cholangitis.

BACKGROUND: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a progressive immune-mediated liver disease, for which no medical therapy has been shown to slow disease progression. However, the horizon for new therapies is encouraging, with several innovative clinical trials in progress. Despite these advancements, there is considerable heterogeneity in the outcomes studied, with lack of consensus as to what outcomes to measure, when to measure and how to measure. Furthermore, there has been a paradigm shift in PSC treatment targets over recent years, moving from biochemistry-based endpoints to histological assessment of liver fibrosis, imaging-based biomarkers and patient-reported outcome measures. The abundance of new interventional trials and evolving endpoints pose opportunities for all stakeholders involved in evaluating novel therapies. To this effect, there is a need to harmonise measures used in clinical trials through the development of a core outcome set (COS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Synthesis of a PSC-specific COS will be conducted in four stages. Initially, a systematic literature review will be performed to identify outcomes previously used in PSC trials, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews conducted with key stakeholders. The latter may include patients, clinicians, researchers, pharmaceutical industry representatives and healthcare payers and regulatory agencies, to identify additional outcomes of importance. Using the outcomes generated from the literature review and stakeholder interviews, an international two-round Delphi survey will be conducted to prioritise outcomes for inclusion in the COS. Finally, a consensus meeting will be convened to ratify the COS and disseminate findings for application in future PSC trials. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the East Midlands-Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 24/EM/0126) for this study. The COS from this study will be widely disseminated including publication in peer-reviewed journals, international conferences, promotion through patient-support groups and made available on the Core Outcomes Measurement in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 1239.

Familywise error for multiple time-to-event endpoints in a group sequential design.

We investigate the familywise error rate (FWER) for time-to-event endpoints evaluated using a group sequential design with a hierarchical testing procedure for secondary endpoints. We show that, in this setup, the correlation between the log-rank test statistics at interim and at end of study is not congruent with the canonical correlation derived for normal-distributed endpoints. We show, both theoretically and by simulation, that the correlation also depends on the level of censoring, the hazard rates of the endpoints, and the hazard ratio. To optimize operating characteristics in this complex scenario, we propose a simulation-based method to assess the FWER which, better than the alpha-spending approach, can inform the choice of critical values for testing secondary endpoints.

The database makes the poison: How the selection of datasets in QSAR models impacts toxicant prediction of higher tier endpoints.

As the United States and the European Union continue their steady march towards the acceptance of new approach methodologies (NAMs), we need to ensure that the available tools are fit for purpose. Critics will be well-positioned to caution against NAMs acceptance and adoption if the tools turn out to be inadequate. In this paper, we focus on Quantitative Structure Activity-Relationship (QSAR) models and highlight how the training database affects quality and performance of these models. Our analysis goes to the point of asking, "are the endpoints extracted from the experimental studies in the database trustworthy, or are they false negatives/positives themselves?" We also discuss the impacts of chemistry on QSAR models, including issues with 2-D structure analyses when dealing with isomers, metabolism, and toxicokinetics. We close our analysis with a discussion of challenges associated with translational toxicology, specifically the lack of adverse outcome pathways/adverse outcome pathway networks (AOPs/AOPNs) for many higher tier endpoints. We recognize that it takes a collaborate effort to build better and higher quality QSAR models especially for higher tier toxicological endpoints. Hence, it is critical to bring toxicologists, statisticians, and machine learning specialists together to discuss and solve these challenges to get relevant predictions.

Assessment of endpoint definitions in curative-intent trials for mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: Head and Neck Cancer International Group consensus recommendations.

Robust time-to-event endpoint definitions are crucial for the assessment of treatment effect and the clinical value of trial interventions. Here, the Head and Neck Cancer International Group investigated endpoint use in phase 3 trials and trials considered potentially practice-changing published between 2008 and 2021 in the curative-intent setting for patients with mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Of the 92 trials reviewed, we show that all core components of endpoint reporting were heterogeneous, including definitions of common terms, such as overall survival and progression-free survival. Our report highlights the urgent need for harmonisation of fundamental components of clinical trial endpoints and the engagement of all stakeholders to ensure the transparent reporting of endpoint details.

Assessment of endpoint definitions in recurrent and metastatic mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma trials: Head and Neck Cancer International Group consensus recommendations.

Transparent and precise endpoint definitions are a crucial aspect of clinical trial conduct and reporting, and are used to communicate the benefit of an intervention. Previous studies have identified inconsistencies in endpoint definitions across oncological clinical trials. Here, the Head and Neck Cancer International Group assessed endpoint definitions from phase 3 trials or trials considered practice-changing for patients with recurrent or metastatic mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, published between 2008 and 2021. We identify considerable and global heterogeneity in endpoint definitions, which undermines the interpretation of results and development of future studies. We show how fundamental components of even incontrovertible endpoints such as overall survival vary widely, highlighting an urgent need for increased rigour in reporting and harmonisation of endpoints.

Surgical Handover Core Outcome Measures (SH-CORE): a protocol for the development of a core outcome set for trials in surgical handover.

BACKGROUND: Surgical handover is associated with a significant risk of care failures. Existing research displays methodological deficiencies and little consensus on the outcomes that should be used to evaluate interventions in this area. This paper reports a protocol to develop a core outcome set (COS) to support standardisation, comparability, and evidence synthesis in future studies of surgical handover between doctors. METHODS: This study adheres to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative guidance for COS development, including the COS-Standards for Development (COS-STAD) and Reporting (COS-STAR) recommendations. It has been registered prospectively on the COMET database and will be led by an international steering group that includes surgical healthcare professionals, researchers, and patient and public partners. An initial list of reported outcomes was generated through a systematic review of interventions to improve surgical handover (PROSPERO: CRD42022363198). Findings of a qualitative evidence synthesis of patient and public perspectives on handover will augment this list, followed by a real-time Delphi survey involving all stakeholder groups. Each Delphi participant will then be invited to take part in at least one online consensus meeting to finalise the COS. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) Research Ethics Committee (202309015, 7th November 2023). Results will be presented at surgical scientific meetings and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. A plain English summary will be disseminated through national websites and social media. The authors aim to integrate the COS into the handover curriculum of the Irish national surgical training body and ensure it is shared internationally with other postgraduate surgical training programmes. Collaborators will be encouraged to share the findings with relevant national health service functions and national bodies. DISCUSSION: This study will represent the first published COS for interventions to improve surgical handover, the first use of a real-time Delphi survey in a surgical context, and will support the generation of better-quality evidence to inform best practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative 2675.  http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2675 .

Two-stage randomized clinical trials with a right-censored endpoint: Comparison of frequentist and Bayesian adaptive designs.

Adaptive randomized clinical trials are of major interest when dealing with a time-to-event outcome in a prolonged observation window. No consensus exists either to define stopping boundaries or to combine p $$ p $$ values or test statistics in the terminal analysis in the case of a frequentist design and sample size adaptation. In a one-sided setting, we compared three frequentist approaches using stopping boundaries relying on α $$ \alpha $$ -spending functions and a Bayesian monitoring setting with boundaries based on the posterior distribution of the log-hazard ratio. All designs comprised a single interim analysis with an efficacy stopping rule and the possibility of sample size adaptation at this interim step. Three frequentist approaches were defined based on the terminal analysis: combination of stagewise statistics (Wassmer) or of p $$ p $$ values (Desseaux), or on patientwise splitting (Jörgens), and we compared the results with those of the Bayesian monitoring approach (Freedman). These different approaches were evaluated in a simulation study and then illustrated on a real dataset from a randomized clinical trial conducted in elderly patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. All approaches controlled for the type I error rate, except for the Bayesian monitoring approach, and yielded satisfactory power. It appears that the frequentist approaches are the best in underpowered trials. The power of all the approaches was affected by the violation of the proportional hazards (PH) assumption. For adaptive designs with a survival endpoint and a one-sided alternative hypothesis, the Wassmer and Jörgens approaches after sample size adaptation should be preferred, unless violation of PH is suspected.

Assessment of the Feasibility of Objective Parameters as Primary End Points for Patients Affected by Knee Osteoarthritis: Protocol for a Pilot, Open Noncontrolled Trial (:SMILE:).

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a disabling condition that affects more than one-third of people older than 65 years. Currently, 80% of these patients report movement limitations, 20% are unable to perform major activities of daily living, and approximately 11% require personal care. In 2014, the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO) recommended, as the first step in the pharmacological treatment of knee osteoarthritis, a background therapy with chronic symptomatic slow-acting osteoarthritic drugs such as glucosamine sulfate, chondroitin sulfate, and hyaluronic acid. The latter has been extensively evaluated in clinical trials as intra-articular and oral administration. Recent reviews have shown that studies on oral hyaluronic acid generally measure symptoms using only subjective parameters, such as visual analog scales or quality of life questionnaires. As a result, objective measures are lacking, and data validity is generally impaired. OBJECTIVE: The main goal of this pilot study with oral hyaluronic acid is to evaluate the feasibility of using objective tools as outcomes to evaluate improvements in knee mobility. We propose ultrasound and range of motion measurements with a goniometer that could objectively correlate changes in joint mobility with pain reduction, as assessed by the visual analog scale. The secondary objective is to collect data to estimate the time and budget for the main double-blind study randomized trial. These data may be quantitative (such as enrollment rate per month, number of screening failures, and new potential outcomes) and qualitative (such as site logistical issues, patient reluctance to enroll, and interpersonal difficulties for investigators). METHODS: This open-label pilot and feasibility study is conducted in an orthopedic clinic (Timisoara, Romania). The study includes male and female participants, aged 50-70 years, who have been diagnosed with symptomatic knee OA and have experienced mild joint discomfort for at least 6 months. Eight patients must be enrolled and treated with Syalox 300 Plus (River Pharma) for 8 weeks. It is a dietary supplement containing high-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid, which has already been marketed in several European countries. Assessments are made at the baseline and final visits. RESULTS: Recruitment and treatment of the 8 patients began on February 15, 2018, and was completed on May 25, 2018. Data analysis was planned to be completed by the end of 2018. The study was funded in February 2019. We expect the results to be published in a peer-reviewed clinical journal in the last quarter of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: The data from this pilot study will be used to assess the feasibility of a future randomized clinical trial in OA. In particular, the planned outcomes (eg, ultrasound and range of motion), safety, and quantitative and qualitative data must be evaluated to estimate in advance the time and budget required for the future main study. Finally, the pilot study should provide preliminary information on the efficacy of the investigational product. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03421054; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03421054. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/13642.