Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Statistical Approaches to Improving Trial Efficiency and Conduct

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Developments in Statistical Evaluation of Clinical Trials

  • 1938 Accesses

Abstract

Given the trend towards increasing complexity and cost of clinical trials today, future trials may end up being small, complex, and under-powered to detect clinically meaningful treatment effects. In order to continue to perform important research in the future, we need to make clinical trial designs more efficient. Through the retrospective statistical analysis of variation in the design of past trials and the prospective comparisons of clinical trials methods, we can determine which trial procedures truly influence the bias and precision of treatment estimates and where complexity and costs can be reduced. We provide two examples of the retrospective study of clinical trials methods that could change the conduct of future trials. First, an overview of the effect of outcome adjudication on treatment estimates for cardiovascular trials is presented. Second, a prognostic model to detect fraud within multi-centre trials is developed as part of a system of central statistical monitoring. There are many more unanswered questions about efficiencies in clinical trials methodology that need to be examined by statisticians and researchers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Al-Marzouki, S., Evans, S., Marshall, T., Roberts, I.: Are these data real? Statistical methods for the detection of data fabrication in clinical trials. British Medical Journal 331, 267–270 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baigent, C., Harrell, F., Buyse, M., Emberson, J., Altman, D.: Ensuring trial validity by data quality assurance and diversification of monitoring methods. Clinical Trials 5, 49–55 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bailey, K.: Detecting fabrication of data in a multicenter collaborative animal study. Controlled Clinical Trials 12, 741–752 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Benford, F.: The law of anomalous numbers. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 78, 551–572 (1938)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boutron, I., Estellat, C., Guittet, L., Dechartres, A., Sackett, D., Hrobjartsson, A., Ravaud, P.: Methods of blinding in reports of randomized controlled trials assessing pharmacologic treatments: A systematic review. PLOS Medicine 3, 1931–1939 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Buyse, M., George, S., Evans, S., Geller, N., Ranstam, J., Scherrer, B., Lesaffre, E., Murray, G., Edler, L., Hutton, J., Colton, T., Lachenbruch, P., Verma, B., for the ISCB Subcommittee on Fraud: The role of biostatistics in the prevention, detection and treatment of fraud in clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 18, 3435–3451 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Canner, P., Krol, W., Forman, S.: External quality control programs. Controlled Clinical Trials 4, 441–466 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Carlisle, J.: The analysis of 169 controlled trials to test data integrity. Anaesthesia pp. 1–17 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Christian, M., McCabe, M., Korn, E., Abrams, J., Kaplan, R., Friedman, M.: The national cancer institute audit of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project B-06. New England Journal of Medicine 333, 1469–1474 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  10. COMMIT (CLOpidogrel and Metroprolol in Myocardial Infarction Trial) collaborative group: Addition of clopidogrel to aspirin in 45852 patients with acute myocardial infarction: randomized placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet 366, 1607–1621 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cook, D., Walter, S., Cook, R., Freitag, A., Guyatt, G., Devitt, H., Meade, M., Griffith, L., Sarabia, A., Fuller, H., Turner, M., Gough, K.: Incidence of and risk factors for ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients. Annuals of Internal Medicine 129, 433–440 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  12. DeMets, D., Califf, R.: Lessons learned from recent cardiovascular clinical trials: Part II. Circulation 106, 880–886 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Devereaux, P., Yang, H., Yusuf, S., Guyatt, G., Leslie, K., Villar, J., Xavier, D., Greenspan, L., Lisheng, L., Xu, S., Malaga, G., Avezum, A., Jacka, M., Choi, P.: Effects of extended-release metoprolol succinate in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (POISE trial): a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet 371, 1839–1847 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Eisenbud, R., Assman, S., Kalish, L., van der Horst, C., Collier, A., for the Viral Activation Transfusion Study (VATS) Group: Differences in difficulty adjudicating clinical events in patients with advanced HIV disease. Journal of Immune Deficiency Syndrome 28, 43–46 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eisenstein, E., Collins, R., Cracknell, B., Posesta, O., Reid, E., Sandercock, P., Shakhov, Y., Terrin, M., Sellers, M., Califf, R.: Sensible approaches for reducing clinical trials costs. Clinical Trials 5, 75–84 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Eisenstein, E., Lemons II, P., Tardiff, B., Schulman, K.A., Jolly, M., Califf, R.: Reducing the costs of phase III cardiovascular clinical trials. American Heart Journal 149, 482–488 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Friedman, L.M., Furberg, C.D., DeMets, D.L.: Fundamentals of Clinical Trials. Springer, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Getz, K., Wenger, J., Campo, R., Seguine, E., Kaitin, K.: Assessing the impact of protocol design changes on clinical trial performance. American Journal of Therapeutics 15, 450–457 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Granger, C., Vogel, V., Cummings, S., Held, P., Fiedorek, F., Lawrence, M., Neal, B., Reidies, H., Santarelli, L., Schroyer, R., Stockbridge, N., Zhao, F.: Do we need to adjudicate major clinical events. Clinical Trials 5, 56–60 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use: Guidelines for good clinical practice E6. Step 4 pp. 1–53 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kestle, J., Milner, R., Drake, D.: An assessment of observer bias in the Shunt Design Trial. Pediatric Neurosurgery 30, 57–61 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Knatterud, G., Rockhold, F., George, S., Barton, F., Davis, C., Fairweather, W., Honohan, T., Mowery, R., O’Neill, R.: Guidelines for quality assurance in multicenter trials: A position paper. Controlled Clinical Trials 19, 477–493 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kradjian, S., Gutheil, J., Baratelle, A., Einstein, S., Kaslo, D.: Development of a charter for an endpoint assessment and adjudication committee. Drug Information Journal 39, 53–61 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kranke, P., Apfell, C., Roewer, N.: Reported data on granisetron and postoperative nausea and vomitting by Fujii et al. are incredibly nice! Anesthesia and Analgesia 90, 1004–1007 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mahaffey, K., Roe, M., Dyke, C., Newby, L., Kleiman, N., Connolly, P., Berdan, L., Sparapani, R., Lee, K., Armstrong, P., Topol, E., Califf, R., Harrington, R., for the PARAGON-B Investigators: Misreporting of myocardial infarction end points: results of adjudication by a central clinical events committee in the PARAGON-B trial. American Heart Journal 143, 242–248 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mathieu, M.P.: Fast track systems. Index of clinical study complexity by year, phases I-IV. In: M.P. Mathieu (ed.) PAREXEL’s Pharmaceutical R&D Statistical Sourcebook (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Morrison, B., Cochran, C., White, J., Harley, J., Kleppinger, C., Liu, A., Mitchel, J., Nickerson, D., Zacharias, C., Kramer, J., Neaton, J.: Monitoring the quality of conduct of clinical trials: a survey of current practices. Trials 8, 342–349 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Neaton, J., Bartsch, G., Broste, S., Cohen, J., Simon, N., for the MRFIT Research Group: A case of data alteration in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT). Controlled Clinical Trials 12, 731–740 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pogue, J., Devereaux, P., Yusuf, S.: Central statistical monitoring: A model to predict fraud in clinical trials. Clinical Trials 10, 225–235 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pogue, J., Walter, S., Yusuf, S.: Evaluating the benefits of event adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes in large simple RCTs. Clinical Trials 6, 239–251 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Preece, D.: Distribution of final digits in data. Statistician 30, 31–60 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Prentice, R.: Opportunities for enhancing efficiency and reducing cost in large scale disease prevention trials: A statistical perspective. Statistics in Medicine 9, 161–172 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Shapiro, M., Charrow, R.: The role of data audits in detecting scientific misconduct: Results of the FDA program. Journal of the American Medical Association 261, 2505–2511 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sicurella, J., Roberts, R., Gent, M.: The operation of a central adjudication committee and its effect on the validity of the assessment of treatment benefit. Controlled Clinical Trials 11, 283 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Taylor, R., McEntegart, D., Stillman, E.: Statistical techniques to detect fraud and other data irregularities in clinical questionnaire data. Drug Information Journal 36, 115–125 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  36. The EPIC Investigators: Use of a monoclonal antibody directed against the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor in high-risk coronary angioplasty. New England Journal of Medicine 330, 956–961 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  37. The EsPS2 Group: European stroke prevention study 2. Efficacy and safety data. Journal of Neurological Sciences 151, S1–S77 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Thornquist, M., Urban, N., Tseng, A., Edelstein, C., Lund, B., Omenn, G.: Research cost analysis to aid in decision making in the conduct of a large prevention trial, CARET. Controlled Clinical Trials 14, 325–339 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Walter, S., Cook, D., Guyatt, G., King, D., Troyan, S., for the Canadian Lung Oncology Group: Outcome assessment for clinical trials: how many adjudicators do we need. Controlled Clinical Trials 18, 27–42 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wampler, S.: Tackling protocol complexity. Good Clinical Practice Journal 7, 6–8 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Weiss, R., Vogelzang, N., Peterson, B., Panasci, L., Carpenter, J., Gavigan, M., Sartell, K., Frei III, E., Mitchel, J., McIntyre, O.: A successful system of scientific data audits for clinical trials: A report from the Cancer and Leukemia Group B. Journal of the American Medical Association 270, 459–464 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  42. White, C.: Suspected research fraud: difficulties of getting the truth. British Medical Journal 331, 281–288 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Yusuf, S., Bosch, J., Devereaux, P., Collins, R., Baigent, C., Granger, C., Califf, R., Temple, R.: Sensible guidelines for the conduct of large randomized trials. Clinical Trials 5, 38–39 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Yusuf, S., Collins, R., Peto, R.: Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials. Statistics in Medicine 3, 409–420 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Yusuf, S., Pfeffer, M., Swedberg, K., Granger, C., Held, P., McMurray, J., Michelson, E., Olofsson, B., Ostergren, J.: Effects of candesartan in patients with chronic heart failure and preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction: the CHARM-Preserved Trial. Lancet 362, 777–781 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Janice Pogue, P. J. Devereaux & Salim Yusuf

Authors
  1. Janice Pogue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. J. Devereaux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Salim Yusuf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Janice Pogue .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biostatistics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Kees van Montfort

  2. Behavioural Science Institute, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Johan Oud

  3. Department of Hematology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Wendimagegn Ghidey

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pogue, J., Devereaux, P.J., Yusuf, S. (2014). Statistical Approaches to Improving Trial Efficiency and Conduct. In: van Montfort, K., Oud, J., Ghidey, W. (eds) Developments in Statistical Evaluation of Clinical Trials. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55345-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation