Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

TREATMENT SWITCHING: STATISTICAL AND DECISION-MAKING CHALLENGES AND APPROACHES

  • Nicholas R. Latimer (a1), Chris Henshall (a2), Uwe Siebert (a3) and Helen Bell (a4)

Abstract

Objectives: Treatment switching refers to the situation in a randomized controlled trial where patients switch from their randomly assigned treatment onto an alternative. Often, switching is from the control group onto the experimental treatment. In this instance, a standard intention-to-treat analysis does not identify the true comparative effectiveness of the treatments under investigation. We aim to describe statistical methods for adjusting for treatment switching in a comprehensible way for nonstatisticians, and to summarize views on these methods expressed by stakeholders at the 2014 Adelaide International Workshop on Treatment Switching in Clinical Trials.

Methods: We describe three statistical methods used to adjust for treatment switching: marginal structural models, two-stage adjustment, and rank preserving structural failure time models. We draw upon discussion heard at the Adelaide International Workshop to explore the views of stakeholders on the acceptability of these methods.

Results: Stakeholders noted that adjustment methods are based on assumptions, the validity of which may often be questionable. There was disagreement on the acceptability of adjustment methods, but consensus that when these are used, they should be justified rigorously. The utility of adjustment methods depends upon the decision being made and the processes used by the decision-maker.

Conclusions: Treatment switching makes estimating the true comparative effect of a new treatment challenging. However, many decision-makers have reservations with adjustment methods. These, and how they affect the utility of adjustment methods, require further exploration. Further technical work is required to develop adjustment methods to meet real world needs, to enhance their acceptability to decision-makers.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      TREATMENT SWITCHING: STATISTICAL AND DECISION-MAKING CHALLENGES AND APPROACHES
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      TREATMENT SWITCHING: STATISTICAL AND DECISION-MAKING CHALLENGES AND APPROACHES
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      TREATMENT SWITCHING: STATISTICAL AND DECISION-MAKING CHALLENGES AND APPROACHES
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

References

Hide All
1. World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA. 2013;310: 21912194.
2. Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Lambert, PC, et al. Adjusting survival time estimates to account for treatment switching in randomised controlled trials – An economic evaluation context: Methods, limitations and recommendations. Med Decis Making. 2014. doi:10.1177/0272989X13520192.
3. Jonsson, L, Sandin, R, Ekman, M, et al. Analyzing overall survival in randomized controlled trials with crossover and implications for economic evaluation. Value Health. 2014;17:707713.
4. Ishak, KJ, Proskorovsky, I, Korytowsky, B, et al. Methods for adjusting for bias due to crossover in oncology trials. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32:533546.
5. Henshall, C, Latimer, NR, Sansom, L, Ward, R. Treatment switching in clinical trials: Issues and proposals following the 2014 Adelaide International Workshop, IJTAHC 2016;32:167–174.
6. Moher, D, Schulz, KF, Altman, DG. CONSORT GROUP (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:657662.
7. Wertz, RT. Intention to treat: Once randomized, always analyzed. Clin Aphasiol. 1995;23:5764.
8. Gupta, SK. Intention-to-treat concept: A review. Perspect Clin Res. 2011;2:109112.
9. Lee, Y, Ellenberg, J, Hirtz, D, Nelson, K. Analysis of clinical trials by treatment actually received: is it really an option? Stat Med. 1991;10:15951605.
10. Horwitz, R, Horwitz, S. Adherence to treatment and health outcomes. Arch Intern Med. 1993;153:18631868.
11. Morden, JP, Lambert, PC, Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Wailoo, AJ. Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in randomised controlled trials: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:4.
12. Latimer, N, Abrams, K, Lambert, P, et al. Adjusting for treatment switching in randomised controlled trials – A simulation study and a simplified two-stage method. Stat Methods Med Res. 2014. doi:10.1177/0962280214557578
13. Latimer, NR, Abrams, KR, Lambert, PC, Morden, JP, Crowther, MJ. Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in clinical trials: A follow-up simulation study. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016. doi:10.1177/0962280216642264
14. Hernan, MA, Brumback, B, Robins, JM. Marginal structural models to estimate the joint causal effect of nonrandomized treatments. J Am Statist Assoc. 2001;96:440448.
15. Cox, DR. Regression models and life tables (with Discussion). J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol. 1972;34:187220
16. Robins, JM, Finkelstein, DM. Correcting for noncompliance and dependent censoring in an AIDS clinical trial with inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) log-rank tests. Biometrics. 2000;56:779788.
17. White, IR, Babiker, AG, Walker, S, Darbyshire, JH. Randomization-based methods for correcting for treatment changes: Examples from the Concorde trial. Stat Med. 1999;18:26172634.
18. Robins, JM, Tsiatis, AA. Correcting for noncompliance in randomized trials using rank preserving structural failure time models. Commun Stat Theory Methods. 1991;20:26092631.
19. Robins, JM, Greenland, S. Adjusting for differential rates of prophylaxis therapy for Pcp in high-dose versus low-dose Azt treatment arms in an aids randomized trial. J Am Stat Assoc. 1994;89:737749.
20. Yamaguchi, T, Ohashi, Y. Adjusting for differential proportions of second-line treatment in cancer clinical trials. Part II: An application in a clinical trial of unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer. Stat Med. 2004;23:20052022.
21. Howe, CJ, Cole, SR, Chmiel, JS, Munoz, A. Limitation of inverse probability-of-censoring weights in estimating survival in the presence of strong selection bias. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;173: 569577.
22. Drummond, M, Evans, B, LeLorier, J, et al. Evidence and values: Requirements for public reimbursement of drugs for rare diseases – A case study in oncology. Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;16:e273e281.

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Latimer Supplementary Material
Figures

 Word (961 KB)
961 KB

TREATMENT SWITCHING: STATISTICAL AND DECISION-MAKING CHALLENGES AND APPROACHES

  • Nicholas R. Latimer (a1), Chris Henshall (a2), Uwe Siebert (a3) and Helen Bell (a4)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed