Direct effect on validity of response run-in selection in clinical trials

被引:40
作者
Berger, VW
Rezvani, A
Makarewicz, VA
机构
[1] NCI, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[2] Univ Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201 USA
[3] Univ N Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
[4] Washington Coll State Maryland, Chestertown, MD USA
[5] Johns Hopkins Univ, Baltimore, MD USA
来源
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS | 2003年 / 24卷 / 02期
关键词
clinical relevance; inference discrepancy; inference population; target population;
D O I
10.1016/S0197-2456(02)00316-1
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
A run-in is a period prior to randomization during which potential participants who have met all entry criteria for a randomized clinical trial are assigned the same regimen, either the control (possibly placebo) or the experimental treatment. Typically, the intention is to exclude from the subsequent study (i.e., randomization) some segment of this cohort, based on their experiences during the run-in period. Selecting patients based on the run-in thereby forces differential representation of certain subpopulations relative to others. Previous studies have addressed the potential for a run-in to jeopardize validity through unintended mechanisms. While these concerns are valid, they leave open the possibility that modifications to the design of the run-in might be able to preserve validity, even if patient selection is based on the results of the run-in. As such, we address the potential for selecting patients based on response during a run-in period to jeopardize validity directly, through its intended effect of overrepresenting (relative to the screened population) some segments in the randomized portion of the trial and underrepresenting others. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:156 / 166
页数:11
相关论文
共 42 条
[21]   THE QUALIFICATION PERIOD [J].
KNIPSCHILD, P ;
LEFFERS, P ;
FEINSTEIN, AR .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1991, 44 (06) :461-464
[22]   RANDOMIZED DISCONTINUATION TRIALS - UTILITY AND EFFICIENCY [J].
KOPEC, JA ;
ABRAHAMOWICZ, M ;
ESDAILE, JM .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1993, 46 (09) :959-971
[23]  
LANG JM, 1987, AM J EPIDEMIOL, V126, P777
[24]   Threats to the validity of clinical trials employing enrichment strategies for sample selection [J].
Leber, PD ;
Davis, CS .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1998, 19 (02) :178-187
[25]  
Longford NT, 1999, STAT MED, V18, P1467, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990630)18:12<1467::AID-SIM149>3.0.CO
[26]  
2-H
[27]   End-point interpretation in clinical trials:: The case for discipline [J].
Moyé, LA .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1999, 20 (01) :40-49
[28]   INTENTION-TO-TREAT ANALYSIS - IMPLICATIONS FOR QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH [J].
NEWELL, DJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1992, 21 (05) :837-841
[29]  
OLSHAUSSEN KV, 1996, NEW ENGL J MED, V335, P1318
[30]   Run-in periods in randomized trials -: Implications for the application of results in clinical practice [J].
Pablos-Méndez, A ;
Barr, RG ;
Shea, S .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 279 (03) :222-225