"Time Saved" Calculations to Improve Decision-Making in Progressive Disease Studies.

BACKGROUND: Disease modifying therapies (DMTs) may be most beneficial in early disease, when progression is slow and changes small, with clinical relevance difficult to interpret. OBJECTIVES: Time component tests (TCTs) translate differences between treatments from mean change, vertical distance between longitudinal trajectories, into intuitively understood time saved, horizontal distance between trajectories, which can be readily combined across endpoints in a global TCT (gTCT). DESIGN: The value of composites, time savings estimates, and combination scores to optimize measurement and interpretation of DMTs are demonstrated, along with construction details and simulation studies. SETTING: TCT methods were applied to a randomized phase II clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with early Alzheimer's disease (N=332). INTERVENTION: Three treatment groups with AFFITOPE® AD02 and two control groups with aluminum oxyhydroxide, AD04. MEASUREMENTS: The co-primary efficacy outcomes were an adapted ADAS-Cog (aADAS) and adapted ADCS-ADL (aADL), which were optimized composite scales specific to cognitive and functional domains. A composite based on these two scores was the study's prespecified primary outcome. The CDR-sb and standard non-adapted ADCS-ADL and ADAS-Cog scales were prespecified secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The AD04 2 mg group showed some statistically significant effects compared with other study arms. It is unclear whether the observed 3.8-point difference on the composite is clinically meaningful. TCT results show a time savings of 11 months in an 18-month study with AD04 2 mg. CONCLUSION: The relevance of 11 months saved is more universally understood than a mean difference of 3.8 points in the composite outcome. These results suggest that a combination of a composite approach and a time savings interpretation offers a powerful approach for detecting and interpreting disease modifying effects.

'Time Saved' As a Demonstration of Clinical Meaningfulness and Illustrated Using the Donanemab TRAILBLAZER-ALZ Study Findings.

In Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials, disease-modifying therapies are expected to slow the rate of disease progression. Treatment effects are evaluated using a validated clinical scale as the difference between treatment and placebo in mean change from baseline to endpoint. Understanding the clinical relevance of this metric is not necessarily intuitive. Expressing active treatment-placebo difference as a time metric (i.e., months saved with treatment) has potential to provide a metric that is more easily and consistently interpreted. Using data from the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ study, time component tests (TCTs) were employed to determine the time saved with donanemab (an amyloid lowering drug) treatment. At study endpoint (Week 76), disease progression was delayed by 5.3 months and 5.2 months as measured by the Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) and the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), respectively.

Investigating Partially Discordant Results in Phase 3 Studies of Aducanumab.

OBJECTIVES: Efficacy and safety results from the EMERGE (NCT02484547) and ENGAGE (NCT02477800) phase 3 studies of aducanumab in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been published. In EMERGE, but not in ENGAGE, high-dose aducanumab demonstrated significant treatment effects across primary and secondary endpoints. Low-dose aducanumab results were consistent across studies with non-significant differences versus placebo that were intermediate to the high-dose arm in EMERGE. The present investigation examined data from EMERGE and ENGAGE through post-hoc analyses to determine factors that contributed to discordant results between the high-dose arms of the two studies. DESIGN: EMERGE and ENGAGE were 2 phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies. SETTING: EMERGE and ENGAGE were 2 global multicenter studies involving 348 sites in 20 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Participants in EMERGE and ENGAGE were aged 50 to 85 years and had mild cognitive impairment or mild AD dementia with confirmed amyloid pathology. The randomized and dosed population (all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study treatment) included 1638 patients in EMERGE and 1647 in ENGAGE. INTERVENTION: In EMERGE and ENGAGE, participants were randomized to receive low- or high-dose aducanumab or placebo (1:1:1) once every 4 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: In this paper, 4 areas were investigated through post-hoc analyses to understand the discordance in the high-dose arms of the EMERGE and ENGAGE studies: baseline characteristics, amyloid-related imaging abnormalities, non-normality of the data, and dosing/exposure to aducanumab. RESULTS: Post-hoc analyses showed that outcomes in the ENGAGE high-dose group were affected by an imbalance in a small number of patients with extremely rapid progression and by lower exposure to the target dose of 10 mg/kg. These factors were confounded and present in early enrolled patients but were not present in later-enrolled patients who were randomized to the target dosing regimen of 10 mg/kg after titration. Neither baseline characteristics nor amyloid-related imaging abnormalities contributed to the difference in results between the high-dose arms. CONCLUSIONS: Results were consistent across studies in later enrolled patients in which the incidence of rapidly progressing patients was balanced across treatment arms.

Two Randomized Phase 3 Studies of Aducanumab in Early Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is a progressive, irreversible, and fatal disease for which accumulation of amyloid beta is thought to play a key role in pathogenesis. Aducanumab is a human monoclonal antibody directed against aggregated soluble and insoluble forms of amyloid beta. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of aducanumab in early Alzheimer's disease. DESIGN: EMERGE and ENGAGE were two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, global, phase 3 studies of aducanumab in patients with early Alzheimer's disease. SETTING: These studies involved 348 sites in 20 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 1638 (EMERGE) and 1647 (ENGAGE) patients (aged 50-85 years, confirmed amyloid pathology) who met clinical criteria for mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease or mild Alzheimer's disease dementia, of which 1812 (55.2%) completed the study. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive aducanumab low dose (3 or 6 mg/kg target dose), high dose (10 mg/kg target dose), or placebo via IV infusion once every 4 weeks over 76 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measure was change from baseline to week 78 on the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), an integrated scale that assesses both function and cognition. Other measures included safety assessments; secondary and tertiary clinical outcomes that assessed cognition, function, and behavior; and biomarker endpoints. RESULTS: EMERGE and ENGAGE were halted based on futility analysis of data pooled from the first approximately 50% of enrolled patients; subsequent efficacy analyses included data from a larger data set collected up to futility declaration and followed prespecified statistical analyses. The primary endpoint was met in EMERGE (difference of -0.39 for high-dose aducanumab vs placebo [95% CI, -0.69 to -0.09; P=.012; 22% decrease]) but not in ENGAGE (difference of 0.03, [95% CI, -0.26 to 0.33; P=.833; 2% increase]). Results of biomarker substudies confirmed target engagement and dose-dependent reduction in markers of Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology. The most common adverse event was amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-edema. CONCLUSIONS: Data from EMERGE demonstrated a statistically significant change across all four primary and secondary clinical endpoints. ENGAGE did not meet its primary or secondary endpoints. A dose- and time-dependent reduction in pathophysiological markers of Alzheimer's disease was observed in both trials.

Aligning Estimators With Estimands in Clinical Trials: Putting the ICH E9(R1) Guidelines Into Practice.

The draft ICH E9(R1) addendum stipulates that an estimator should align with its associated estimand and yield an estimate that facilitates reliable interpretations. The addendum further stipulates that assumptions should be justifiable and plausible, and that the extent of assumptions is an important consideration for whether an estimate will be robust because assumptions are often unverifiable. The draft addendum specifies 5 strategies for dealing with intercurrent events. The intent of this paper is to provide conceptual considerations and technical details for various estimators that align with these strategies. We include focus on how the nature and extent of assumptions influences the potential robustness of the various estimators. The content reflects the knowledge, experience, and opinions of the Drug Information Association's Scientific Working Group on Missing Data. This group includes experienced statisticians from across industry and academia, primarily in the US and European Union.

Efficacy and safety of continuous every-2-week dosing of ixekizumab over 52 weeks in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in a randomized phase III trial (IXORA-P).

BACKGROUND: Ixekizumab is an interleukin-17A antagonist approved for treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis with a recommended 160-mg starting dose, then 80 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) to week 12, and every 4 weeks (Q4W) thereafter. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate continuous Q2W dosing over 52 weeks. METHODS: In this phase III, multicentre, double-blinded, parallel-group trial, three ixekizumab dosing regimens were assessed for efficacy and safety at week 52 in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis randomized at a 2 : 1 : 1 ratio to continuous Q2W (n = 611), continuous Q4W (n = 310) or dose adjustment per protocol (Q4W/Q2W, n = 306), each with a 160-mg starting dose. Dose adjustment was determined by predefined criteria to which investigators were blinded; 72 (23?5%) patients in the Q4W/Q2W group adjusted dose. Efficacy outcomes were evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Co-primary end points were met at week 52: Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 responses for Q2W and Q4W dose groups were 85·9% and 79·0%, respectively (P = 0·006), and static patient global assessment 0/1 responses for Q2W and Q4W dose groups were 78·6% and 70·6%, respectively (P = 0·005). Treatment-emergent and serious adverse events were comparable across dose groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ixekizumab Q2W had higher efficacy at week 52 than ixekizumab Q4W, with no increase in safety events.

Recent Developments in the Prevention and Treatment of Missing Data.

Recent research has fostered new guidance on preventing and treating missing data, most notably the landmark expert panel report from the National Research Council (NRC) that was commissioned by FDA. One of the findings from that panel was the need for better software tools to conduct missing data sensitivity analyses and frameworks for drawing inference from them. In response to the NRC recommendations, a Scientific Working Group was formed under the Auspices of the Drug Information Association (DIASWG). The present paper is from work of the DIASWG. Specifically, the NRC panel's 18 recommendations are distilled into 3 pillars for dealing with missing data: (1) providing clearly stated objectives and causal estimands; (2) preventing as much missing data as possible; and (3) combining a sensible primary analysis with sensitivity analyses to assess robustness of inferences to missing data assumptions. Sample data sets are used to illustrate how sensitivity analyses can be used to assess robustness of inferences to missing data assumptions. The suite of software tools used to conduct the sensitivity analyses are freely available for public use at www.missingdata.org.uk.

A structured framework for assessing sensitivity to missing data assumptions in longitudinal clinical trials.

The objective of this research was to demonstrate a framework for drawing inference from sensitivity analyses of incomplete longitudinal clinical trial data via a re-analysis of data from a confirmatory clinical trial in depression. A likelihood-based approach that assumed missing at random (MAR) was the primary analysis. Robustness to departure from MAR was assessed by comparing the primary result to those from a series of analyses that employed varying missing not at random (MNAR) assumptions (selection models, pattern mixture models and shared parameter models) and to MAR methods that used inclusive models. The key sensitivity analysis used multiple imputation assuming that after dropout the trajectory of drug-treated patients was that of placebo treated patients with a similar outcome history (placebo multiple imputation). This result was used as the worst reasonable case to define the lower limit of plausible values for the treatment contrast. The endpoint contrast from the primary analysis was - 2.79 (p = .013). In placebo multiple imputation, the result was - 2.17. Results from the other sensitivity analyses ranged from - 2.21 to - 3.87 and were symmetrically distributed around the primary result. Hence, no clear evidence of bias from missing not at random data was found. In the worst reasonable case scenario, the treatment effect was 80% of the magnitude of the primary result. Therefore, it was concluded that a treatment effect existed. The structured sensitivity framework of using a worst reasonable case result based on a controlled imputation approach with transparent and debatable assumptions supplemented a series of plausible alternative models under varying assumptions was useful in this specific situation and holds promise as a generally useful framework.

A structured approach to choosing estimands and estimators in longitudinal clinical trials.

An important evolution in the missing data arena has been the recognition of need for clarity in objectives. The objectives of primary focus in clinical trials can often be categorized as assessing efficacy or effectiveness. The present investigation illustrated a structured framework for choosing estimands and estimators when testing investigational drugs to treat the symptoms of chronic illnesses. Key issues were discussed and illustrated using a reanalysis of the confirmatory trials from a new drug application in depression. The primary analysis used a likelihood-based approach to assess efficacy: mean change to the planned endpoint of the trial assuming patients stayed on drug. Secondarily, effectiveness was assessed using a multiple imputation approach. The imputation model-derived solely from the placebo group-was used to impute missing values for both the drug and placebo groups. Therefore, this so-called placebo multiple imputation (a.k.a. controlled imputation) approach assumed patients had reduced benefit from the drug after discontinuing it. Results from the example data provided clear evidence of efficacy for the experimental drug and characterized its effectiveness. Data after discontinuation of study medication were not required for these analyses. Given the idiosyncratic nature of drug development, no estimand or approach is universally appropriate. However, the general practice of pairing efficacy and effectiveness estimands may often be useful in understanding the overall risks and benefits of a drug. Controlled imputation approaches, such as placebo multiple imputation, can be a flexible and transparent framework for formulating primary analyses of effectiveness estimands and sensitivity analyses for efficacy estimands.

The enrichment window approach as a means of dealing with placebo response in antidepressant clinical trials.

In this issue, Merlo-Pich et al. present an enrichment-window approach that identifies sites with aberrant mean placebo responses and excludes data from those sites so as to improve drug-placebo discrimination in antidepressant clinical trials. The method appears to increase the signal in situations in which the test drug is better than placebo. However, confirmation of its impact on the rate of false-positive results is needed before the method can be used prospectively.

[Lung transplantation in cystic fibrosis--a position paper]. / Lungentransplantation bei Mukoviszidose--ein Positionspapier.

Lung transplantation in cystic fibrosis is an established therapy, due to the fact that vast majority of adult CF patients will develop respiratory failure. Even adolescents and children can be transplanted successfully today. Lung transplantation in cystic fibrosis requires special consideration concerning candidate selection, surgery and postoperative follow-up care. Due to a donor shortage and increasing waiting time, early referral to transplant centres of potential candidates is crucial. In the process of candidate selection, assumed improvements in quality of life and survival benefit should be weighed against contraindications. Centre-based follow-up and close cooperation with local physicians are key factors for success. During follow-up care, the transplantation team should be contacted immediately in the case of any problem or change in medication.

The impact of analytic method on interpretation of outcomes in longitudinal clinical trials.

AIMS: Various analytical strategies for addressing missing data in clinical trials are utilised in reporting study results. The most commonly used analytical methods include the last observation carried forward (LOCF), observed case (OC) and the mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM). Each method requires certain assumptions regarding the characteristics of the missing data. If the assumptions for any particular method are not valid, results from that method can be biased. Results based on these different analytical methods can, therefore, be inconsistent, thereby making interpretation of clinical study results confusing. In this investigation, we compare results from MMRM, LOCF and OC in order to illustrate the potential biases and problems in interpretation. METHODS: Data from an 8-month, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled (placebo; n = 137), outpatient depression clinical trial comparing a serotonin-noradrenalin reuptake inhibitor (SNRI; n = 273) with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI; n = 274) were used. The study visit schedule included efficacy and safety assessments weekly to week 4, bi-weekly to week 8, and then monthly. Visitwise mean changes for the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD(17)) Maier subscale (primary efficacy outcome), blood pressure, and body weight were analysed using LOCF, MMRM and OC. RESULTS: Last observation carried forward consistently underestimated within-group mean changes in efficacy (benefit) and safety (risk) for both drugs compared with MMRM, whereas OC tended to overestimate within-group changes. CONCLUSIONS: Inferences are based on between-group comparisons. Therefore, whether or not underestimating (overestimating) within-group changes was conservative or anticonservative depended on the relative magnitude of the bias in each treatment and on whether within-group changes represented improvement or worsening. Preference should be given in analytic plans to methods whose assumptions are more likely to be valid rather than relying on a method based on the hope that its results, if biased, will be conservative.

Patterns of depressive symptom response in duloxetine-treated outpatients with mild, moderate or more severe depression.

AIMS: This was a post hoc analysis to determine whether baseline severity of depression influenced the efficacy of duloxetine in treating major depressive disorder (MDD) and to better characterise the symptom response profile for duloxetine in patients with mild, moderate or more severe depression. METHODS: Data were pooled from four double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in which outpatients with MDD were randomised to duloxetine (60 mg/day) or placebo for 8-9 weeks. Patients were retrospectively stratified according to baseline 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating scale (HAMD17) total scores: mild=total score

Duloxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a placebo- and paroxetine-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Duloxetine doses of 80 and 120 mg/day were assessed for efficacy and safety in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, patients age > or =18 meeting DSM-IV criteria for MDD were randomized to placebo (N=99), duloxetine 80 mg/day (N=93), duloxetine 120 mg/day (N=103), or paroxetine 20 mg/day (N=97). The primary outcome measure was mean change from baseline in the 17-item Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAMD(17)) total score after 8 weeks of treatment; a number of secondary efficacy measures also were assessed. Safety and tolerability were assessed via collection and analysis of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, and weight. The Arizona sexual experiences scale was used to assess sexual functioning. Patients who had a > or =30% reduction from baseline in the HAMD(17) total score at the end of the acute phase entered a 6-month continuation phase where they remained on the same treatment as they had taken during the acute phase; efficacy and safety/tolerability outcomes were assessed during continuation treatment. RESULTS: More than 87% of patients completed the acute phase in each treatment group. Duloxetine-treated patients (both doses) showed significantly greater improvement (P<0.05) in the HAMD(17) total score at week 8 compared with placebo. Paroxetine was not significantly different from placebo (P=0.089) on mean change on the HAMD(17). Duloxetine 120 mg/day also showed significant improvement on most secondary efficacy measures (six of nine) compared with placebo while duloxetine 80 mg/day (three of nine) and paroxetine (three of nine) were significantly superior to placebo on fewer secondary measures. HAMD(17) mean change data from this study and an identical sister study were pooled as defined a priori for the purposes of performing a non-inferiority test versus paroxetine. Both duloxetine doses met statistical criteria for non-inferiority to paroxetine. TEAE reporting rates were low in all treatment groups and no deaths occurred in the acute or continuation phases. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of duloxetine at doses of 80 and 120 mg/day in the treatment of MDD was demonstrated. Tolerability, as measured by TEAEs, and safety were similar to paroxetine 20 mg/day and consistent with previous published data on duloxetine in the treatment of MDD.

Incorporation of biodegradable nanoparticles into human airway epithelium cells-in vitro study of the suitability as a vehicle for drug or gene delivery in pulmonary diseases.

PURPOSE: Nanoparticles are able to enhance drug or DNA stability for purposes of optimised deposition to targeted tissues. Surface modifications can mediate drug targeting. The suitability of nanoparticles synthesised out of porcine gelatin, human serum albumin, and polyalkylcyanoacrylate as drug and gene carriers for pulmonary application was investigated in vitro on primary airway epithelium cells and the cell line 16HBE14o-. METHODS: The uptake of nanoparticles into these cells was examined by confocal laser scan microscopy (CLSM) and flow cytometry (FACS). Further the cytotoxicity of nanoparticles was evaluated by an LDH-release-test and the inflammatory potential of the nanoparticles was assessed by measuring IL-8 release. RESULTS: CLSM and FACS experiments showed that the nanoparticles were incorporated into bronchial epithelial cells provoking little or no cytotoxicity and no inflammation as measured by IL-8 release. CONCLUSIONS: Based on their low cytotoxicity and the missing inflammatory potential in combination with an efficient uptake in human bronchial epithelial cells, protein-based nanoparticles are suitable drug and gene carriers for pulmonary application.

Central and peripheral temperature changes in sheep following ovariectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if ovariectomized ewes undergo periodic body temperature rises (hot flashes) similar to women at menopause. METHODS: Eighteen mature ewes were assigned to ovariectomy (OVX), ovariectomy+17 beta-estradiol implant (OVXE) or Sham. Electronic temperature loggers placed subcutaneously over the carotid artery and within the abdomen (core) and subcutaneously in the thigh and axilla (peripheral) were programmed to record body temperatures every 2.5 min for 59 days. Circadian rhythm changes were avoided by dividing readings into 1 h intervals. Hot flashes were defined as a 0.2 or 0.4 degrees C increase over the minimum temperature recorded for a 1 h interval for each sheep. RESULTS: Logger placement did not reflect core and peripheral temperatures. The carotid and abdominal sites were most useful. The percentage of readings considered HF at the carotid site was 63% OVX, 54% OVXE and 37% Sham (P<0.001), and at the abdominal site were 32% OVX, 15% OVE and 17% Sham (P<0.001). When only the first 7 days after ovariectomy were analyzed, the percentage of readings considered to be HF at the carotid site was 75% OVX, 63% OVXE, and 49% Sham (P<0.001), and at the abdominal site was 35% OVX, 15% OVXE and 17% Sham (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ovariectomy in the ewe does illicit changes in body temperature compared with control ewes, which may be interpreted as HF. However, shifts in the circadian rhythm were not apparent. Estradiol treatment led to milder and less frequent HF. Periodic HF in species other than rats have heretofore not been reported.

Mechanical strain, induced noninvasively in the high-frequency domain, is anabolic to cancellous bone, but not cortical bone.

Departing from the premise that it is the large-amplitude signals inherent to intense functional activity that define bone morphology, we propose that it is the far lower magnitude, high-frequency mechanical signals that continually barrage the skeleton during longer term activities such as standing, which regulate skeletal architecture. To examine this hypothesis, we proposed that brief exposure to slight elevations in these endogenous mechanical signals would suffice to increase bone mass in those bones subject to the stimulus. This was tested by exposing the hind limbs of adult female sheep (n = 9) to 20 min/day of low-level (0.3g), high-frequency (30 Hz) mechanical signals, sufficient to induce a peak of approximately 5 microstrain (micro epsilon) in the tibia. Following euthanasia, peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) was used to segregate the cortical shell from the trabecular envelope of the proximal femur, revealing a 34.2% increase in bone density in the experimental animals as compared with controls (p = 0.01). Histomorphometric examination of the femur supported these density measurements, with bone volume per total volume increasing by 32% (p = 0.04). This density increase was achieved by two separate strategies: trabecular spacing decreased by 36.1% (p = 0.02), whereas trabecular number increased by 45.6% (p = 0.01), indicating the formation of cancellous bone de novo. There were no significant differences in the radii of animals subject to the stimulus, indicating that the adaptive response was local rather than systemic. The anabolic potential of the signal was evident only in trabecular bone, and there were no differences, as measured by any assay, in the cortical bone. These data suggest that subtle mechanical signals generated during predominant activities such as posture may be potent determinants of skeletal morphology. Given that these strain levels are three orders of magnitude below strains that can damage bone tissue, we believe that a noninvasive stimulus based on this sensitivity has potential for treating skeletal complications such as osteoporosis.

Anabolism. Low mechanical signals strengthen long bones.

Although the skeleton's adaptability to load-bearing has been recognized for over a century, the specific mechanical components responsible for strengthening it have not been identified. Here we show that after mechanically stimulating the hindlimbs of adult sheep on a daily basis for a year with 20-minute bursts of very-low-magnitude, high-frequency vibration, the density of the spongy (trabecular) bone in the proximal femur is significantly increased (by 34.2%) compared to controls. As the strain levels generated by this treatment are three orders of magnitude below those that damage bone tissue, this anabolic, non-invasive stimulus may have potential for treating skeletal conditions such as osteoporosis.

Accounting for dropout bias using mixed-effects models.

Treatment effects are often evaluated by comparing change over time in outcome measures. However, valid analyses of longitudinal data can be problematic when subjects discontinue (dropout) prior to completing the study. This study assessed the merits of likelihood-based repeated measures analyses (MMRM) compared with fixed-effects analysis of variance where missing values were imputed using the last observation carried forward approach (LOCF) in accounting for dropout bias. Comparisons were made in simulated data and in data from a randomized clinical trial. Subject dropout was introduced in the simulated data to generate ignorable and nonignorable missingness. Estimates of treatment group differences in mean change from baseline to endpoint from MMRM were, on average, markedly closer to the true value than estimates from LOCF in every scenario simulated. Standard errors and confidence intervals from MMRM accurately reflected the uncertainty of the estimates, whereas standard errors and confidence intervals from LOCF underestimated uncertainty.