4.5 Article

Power/sample size calculations for assessing correlates of risk in clinical efficacy trials

期刊

STATISTICS IN MEDICINE
卷 35, 期 21, 页码 3745-3759

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6952

关键词

case-cohort design; case-control design; immune response biomarkers; measurement error; principal stratification; two-phase sampling design; vaccine efficacy trial

资金

  1. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R37AI054165, UM1AI068635]
  2. US Military HIV Research Program (MHRP)
  3. US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command
  4. NIAID
  5. US and Thai Components, Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Science
  6. Ministry of Public Health, Thailand
  7. Mahidol University
  8. SanofiPasteur
  9. Global Solutions for Infectious Diseases

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In a randomized controlled clinical trial that assesses treatment efficacy, a common objective is to assess the association of a measured biomarker response endpoint with the primary study endpoint in the active treatment group, using a case-cohort, case-control, or two-phase sampling design. Methods for power and sample size calculations for such biomarker association analyses typically do not account for the level of treatment efficacy, precluding interpretation of the biomarker association results in terms of biomarker effect modification of treatment efficacy, with detriment that the power calculations may tacitly and inadvertently assume that the treatment harms some study participants. We develop power and sample size methods accounting for this issue, and the methods also account for inter-individual variability of the biomarker that is not biologically relevant (e.g., due to technical measurement error). We focus on a binary study endpoint and on a biomarker subject to measurement error that is normally distributed or categorical with two or three levels. We illustrate the methods with preventive HIV vaccine efficacy trials and include an R package implementing the methods. Copyright (c) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据