Rethinking intercurrent events in defining estimands for tuberculosis trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Tuberculosis remains one of the leading causes of death from an infectious disease globally. Both choices of outcome definitions and approaches to handling events happening post-randomisation can change the treatment effect being estimated, but these are often inconsistently described, thus inhibiting clear interpretation and comparison across trials.

METHODS

Starting from the ICH E9(R1) addendum's definition of an estimand, we use our experience of conducting large Phase III tuberculosis treatment trials and our understanding of the estimand framework to identify the key decisions regarding how different event types are handled in the primary outcome definition, and the important points that should be considered in making such decisions. A key issue is the handling of intercurrent (i.e. post-randomisation) events (ICEs) which affect interpretation of or preclude measurement of the intended final outcome. We consider common ICEs including treatment changes and treatment extension, poor adherence to randomised treatment, re-infection with a new strain of tuberculosis which is different from the original infection, and death. We use two completed tuberculosis trials (REMoxTB and STREAM Stage 1) as illustrative examples. These trials tested non-inferiority of new tuberculosis treatment regimens versus a control regimen. The primary outcome was a binary composite endpoint, 'favourable' or 'unfavourable', which was constructed from several components.

RESULTS

We propose the following improvements in handling the above-mentioned ICEs and loss to follow-up (a post-randomisation event that is not in itself an ICE). First, changes to allocated regimens should not necessarily be viewed as an unfavourable outcome; from the patient perspective, the potential harms associated with a change in the regimen should instead be directly quantified. Second, handling poor adherence to randomised treatment using a per-protocol analysis does not necessarily target a clear estimand; instead, it would be desirable to develop ways to estimate the treatment effects more relevant to programmatic settings. Third, re-infection with a new strain of tuberculosis could be handled with different strategies, depending on whether the outcome of interest is the ability to attain culture negativity from infection with any strain of tuberculosis, or specifically the presenting strain of tuberculosis. Fourth, where possible, death could be separated into tuberculosis-related and non-tuberculosis-related and handled using appropriate strategies. Finally, although some losses to follow-up would result in early treatment discontinuation, patients lost to follow-up before the end of the trial should not always be classified as having an unfavourable outcome. Instead, loss to follow-up should be separated from not completing the treatment, which is an ICE and may be considered as an unfavourable outcome.

CONCLUSION

The estimand framework clarifies many issues in tuberculosis trials but also challenges trialists to justify and improve their outcome definitions. Future trialists should consider all the above points in defining their outcomes.

The ring vaccination trial design for the estimation of vaccine efficacy and effectiveness during infectious disease outbreaks

The ring vaccination trial is a recently developed approach for evaluating the efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines, modeled after the surveillance and containment strategy of ring vaccination. Contacts and contacts of contacts of a newly identified disease case form a ring, and these rings are randomized as part of a cluster-randomized trial or with individual randomization within rings. Key advantages of the design include its flexibility to follow the epidemic as it progresses and the targeting of high-risk participants to increase power. We describe the application of the design to estimate the efficacy and effectiveness of an Ebola vaccine during the 2014-2016 West African Ebola epidemic. The design has several notable statistical features. Because vaccination occurs around the time of exposure, the design is particularly sensitive to the choice of per protocol analysis period. If incidence wanes before the per protocol analysis period begins (due to a slow-acting vaccine or a fast-moving pathogen), power can be substantially reduced. Mathematical modeling is valuable for exploring the suitability of the approach in different disease settings. Another statistical feature is zero inflation, which can occur if the chain of transmission does not take off within a ring. In the application to Ebola, the majority of rings had zero subsequent cases. The ring vaccination trial can be extended in several ways, including the definition of rings (e.g. contact-based, spatial, and occupational). The design will be valuable in settings where the spatio-temporal spread of the pathogen is highly focused and unpredictable.

DESIGN OF VACCINE TRIALS DURING OUTBREAKS WITH AND WITHOUT A DELAYED VACCINATION COMPARATOR

Conducting vaccine efficacy trials during outbreaks of emerging pathogens poses particular challenges. The "Ebola ça suffit" trial in Guinea used a novel ring vaccination cluster randomized design to target populations at highest risk of infection. Another key feature of the trial was the use of a delayed vaccination arm as a comparator, in which clusters were randomized to immediate vaccination or vaccination 21 days later. This approach, chosen to improve ethical acceptability of the trial, complicates the statistical analysis as participants in the comparison arm are eventually protected by vaccine. Furthermore, for infectious diseases, we observe time of illness onset and not time of infection, and we may not know the time required for the vaccinee to develop a protective immune response. As a result, including events observed shortly after vaccination may bias the per protocol estimate of vaccine efficacy. We provide a framework for approximating the bias and power of any given analysis period as functions of the background infection hazard rate, disease incubation period, and vaccine immune response. We use this framework to provide recommendations for designing standard vaccine efficacy trials and trials with a delayed vaccination comparator. Briefly, narrower analysis periods within the correct window can minimize or eliminate bias but may suffer from reduced power. Designs should be reasonably robust to misspecification of the incubation period and time to develop a vaccine immune response.

Best (but oft-forgotten) practices: intention-to-treat, treatment adherence, and missing participant outcome data in the nutrition literature

Among clinical trials of adequate size, randomization balances both known and unknown prognostic factors between trial arms, thus allowing an unbiased comparison of intervention and control. To preserve this benefit, all randomly assigned participants should be followed to study termination and analyzed in the arm to which they were allocated. There are 2 potential limitations in study implementation: 1) patients are nonadherent and continue with follow-up visits, or 2) patients are lost to follow-up and their outcome data are missing. Herein, we address these issues with an emphasis on binary outcomes, and discuss how authors of randomized trials should address issues of both noncompliance and missing data.

Theory-Driven Process Evaluation of the SHINE Trial Using a Program Impact Pathway Approach

Two reasons for the lack of success of programs or interventions are poor alignment of interventions with the causes of the problem targeted by the intervention, leading to poor efficacy (theory failure), and failure to implement interventions as designed (program failure). These failures are important for both public health programs and randomized trials. In the Sanitation Hygiene and Infant Nutrition Efficacy (SHINE) Trial, we utilize the program impact pathway (PIP) approach to track intervention implementation and behavior uptake. In this article, we present the SHINE PIP including definitions and measurements of key mediating domains, and discuss the implications of this approach for randomized trials. Operationally, the PIP can be used for monitoring and strengthening intervention delivery, facilitating course-correction at various stages of implementation. Analytically, the PIP can facilitate a richer understanding of the mediating and modifying determinants of intervention impact than would be possible from an intention-to-treat analysis alone.

Rational Helicobacter pylori therapy: evidence-based medicine rather than medicine-based evidence

Data are available such that choice of Helicobacter pylori therapy for an individual patient can be reliably predicted. Here, treatment success is defined as a cure rate of 90% or greater. Treatment outcome in a population or a patient can be calculated based on the effectiveness of a regimen for infections with susceptible and with resistant strains coupled with the knowledge of the prevalence of resistance (ie, based on formal measurement, clinical experience, or both). We provide the formula for predicting outcome and we illustrate the calculations. Because clarithromycin-containing triple therapy and 10-day sequential therapy are now only effective in special populations, they are considered obsolete; neither should continue to be used as empiric therapies (ie, 7- and 14-day triple therapies fail when clarithromycin resistance exceeds 5% and 15%, respectively, and 10-day sequential therapy fails when metronidazole resistance exceeds 20%). Therapy should be individualized based on prior history and whether the patient is in a high-risk group for resistance. The preferred choices for Western countries are 14-day concomitant therapy, 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy, and 14-day hybrid sequential-concomitant therapy. We also provide details regarding the successful use of fluoroquinolone-, rifabutin-, and furazolidone-containing therapies. Finally, we provide recommendations for the efficient development (ie, identification and optimization) of new regimens, as well as how to prevent or minimize failures. The trial-and-error approach for identifying and testing regimens frequently resulted in poor treatment success. The described approach allows outcome to be predicted and should simplify treatment and drug development.

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparative study on the safety and efficacy of Celecoxib and GCSB-5, dried extracts of six herbs, for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

This prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study compared the efficacy and safety of Celecoxib and GCSB-5, a new product from extracts of six herbs, for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 198 eligible patients were randomly assigned to the Celecoxib group (n=99 patients) or the GCSB-5 group (n=99 patients) for the 12-week study. The amount of change and percentage of the change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Arthritis Index from the baseline, the change in pain on walking by visual analogue scale (VAS), physician's global assessment on response to therapy (PGART) by five point Likert scale, and the amount of rescue medicine taken were used as parameters for efficacy. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were carefully investigated.

RESULTS

The WOMAC score improved in both the Celecoxib group and GCSB-5 group by 20.5 and 21.3 (P=0.79). The percentage of the change in WOMAC score were -42.0% and -38.9% (P=0.54). The pain VAS score decreased by 29.9 and 27.9 (P=0.58). The responders by PGART were 95.3% and 93.8% (P= 0.66), and the median amount of rescue medicine taken were 2.0 and 6.5 tablets (P=0.06). The incidence of ADRs were 31.3% and 21.2% (P=0.11). The most common ADRs were gastrointestinal system related; 17.2% in GCSB-5 group and 22.2% in Celecoxib group. Any severe ADR was not observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The result of this study supports that GCSB-5 is comparable to Celecoxib in terms of the efficacy and safety for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint.