UCL  IRIS
Institutional Research Information Service
UCL Logo
Please report any queries concerning the funding data grouped in the sections named "Externally Awarded" or "Internally Disbursed" (shown on the profile page) to your Research Finance Administrator. Your can find your Research Finance Administrator at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/finance/research/rs-contacts.php by entering your department
Please report any queries concerning the student data shown on the profile page to:

Email: portico-services@ucl.ac.uk

Help Desk: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ras/portico/helpdesk
Publication Detail
Borrowing information across patient subgroups in clinical trials, with application to a paediatric trial
  • Publication Type:
    Journal article
  • Authors:
    Turner RM, Turkova A, Moore CL, Bamford A, Archary M, Barlow-Mosha LN, Cotton MF, Cressey TR, Kaudha E, Lugemwa A, Lyall H, Mujuru HA, Mulenga V, Musiime V, Rojo P, Tudor-Williams G, Welch SB, Gibb DM, Ford D, White IR
  • Publisher:
    Springer Science and Business Media LLC
  • Publication date:
    20/02/2022
  • Journal:
    BMC Medical Research Methodology
  • Volume:
    22
  • Article number:
    49
  • Status:
    Published
  • Print ISSN:
    1471-2288
  • Language:
    English
  • Notes:
    © The Author(s) 2022. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativeco mmons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data
Abstract
Background: Clinical trial investigators may need to evaluate treatment effects in a specific subgroup (or subgroups) of participants in addition to reporting results of the entire study population. Such subgroups lack power to detect a treatment effect, but there may be strong justification for borrowing information from a larger patient group within the same trial, while allowing for differences between populations. Our aim was to develop methods for eliciting expert opinions about differences in treatment effect between patient populations, and to incorporate these opinions into a Bayesian analysis. Methods: We used an interaction parameter to model the relationship between underlying treatment effects in two subgroups. Elicitation was used to obtain clinical opinions on the likely values of the interaction parameter, since this parameter is poorly informed by the data. Feedback was provided to experts to communicate how uncertainty about the interaction parameter corresponds with relative weights allocated to subgroups in the Bayesian analysis. The impact on the planned analysis was then determined. Results: The methods were applied to an ongoing non-inferiority trial designed to compare antiretroviral therapy regimens in 707 children living with HIV and weighing ≥ 14 kg, with an additional group of 85 younger children weighing < 14 kg in whom the treatment effect will be estimated separately. Expert clinical opinion was elicited and demonstrated that substantial borrowing is supported. Clinical experts chose on average to allocate a relative weight of 78% (reduced from 90% based on sample size) to data from children weighing ≥ 14 kg in a Bayesian analysis of the children weighing < 14 kg. The total effective sample size in the Bayesian analysis was 386 children, providing 84% predictive power to exclude a difference of more than 10% between arms, whereas the 85 younger children weighing < 14 kg provided only 20% power in a standalone frequentist analysis. Conclusions: Borrowing information from a larger subgroup or subgroups can facilitate estimation of treatment effects in small subgroups within a clinical trial, leading to improved power and precision. Informative prior distributions for interaction parameters are required to inform the degree of borrowing and can be informed by expert opinion. We demonstrated accessible methods for obtaining opinions.
Publication data is maintained in RPS. Visit https://rps.ucl.ac.uk
 More search options
UCL Researchers Show More
Author
Infection, Immunity & Inflammation Dept
Author
MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL
Author
MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL
Author
MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL
Author
MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL
Author
Inst of Clinical Trials &Methodology
University College London - Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Tel:+44 (0)20 7679 2000

© UCL 1999–2011

Search by