首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Research Methodology >Handling informative dropout in longitudinal analysis of health-related quality of life: application of three approaches to data from the esophageal cancer clinical trial PRODIGE 5/ACCORD 17
【24h】

Handling informative dropout in longitudinal analysis of health-related quality of life: application of three approaches to data from the esophageal cancer clinical trial PRODIGE 5/ACCORD 17

机译:处理与健康相关生活质量的纵向分析信息辍学:从食管癌临床试验中的三种数据应用于食管癌临床试验潜品5 / Accord 17

获取原文
       

摘要

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has become a major endpoint to assess the clinical benefit of new therapeutic strategies in oncology clinical trials. Typically, HRQoL outcomes are analyzed using linear mixed models (LMMs). However, longitudinal analysis of HRQoL in the presence of missing data remains complex and unstandardized. Our objective was to compare the modeling alternatives that account for informative dropout. We investigated three alternative methods—the selection model (SM), pattern-mixture model (PMM), and shared-parameters model (SPM)—in relation to the LMM. We first compared them on the basis of methodological arguments highlighting their advantages and drawbacks. Then, we applied them to data from a randomized clinical trial that included 267 patients with advanced esophageal cancer for the analysis of four HRQoL dimensions evaluated using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 questionnaire. We highlighted differences in terms of outputs, interpretation, and underlying modeling assumptions; this methodological comparison could guide the choice of method according to the context. In the application, none of the four models detected a significant difference between the two treatment arms. The estimated effect of time on HRQoL varied according to the method: for all analyzed dimensions, the PMM estimated an effect that contrasted with those estimated by the SM and SPM; the LMM estimated effects were confirmed by the SM (on two of four HRQoL dimensions) and SPM (on three of four HRQoL dimensions). The PMM, SM, or SPM should be used to confirm or invalidate the results of LMM analysis when informative dropout is suspected. Of these three alternative methods, the SPM appears to be the most interesting from both theoretical and practical viewpoints. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00861094 .
机译:与健康有关的生活质量(HRQOL)已成为评估肿瘤临床试验新治疗策略的临床益处的主要终点。通常,使用线性混合模型(LMM)分析HRQOL结果。然而,在缺失数据存在下,HRQOL的纵向分析仍然复杂和非标准化。我们的目标是将建模替代品进行比较,该替代方案占用的信息辍学。我们调查了三种替代方法 - 选择模型(SM),模式 - 混合模型(PMM)和共享参数模型(SPM)-IN与LMM的关系。我们首先将它们基于突出其优点和缺点的方法论争论。然后,我们将它们应用于随机临床试验中的数据,其中包含267名晚期食管癌的患者,用于分析使用欧洲研究和治疗癌症(EORTC)QLQ-C30问卷调查问卷的研究和治疗的四个HRQOL尺寸。我们强调了产出,解释和潜在建模假设方面的差异;该方法学比较可以指导根据上下文的方法选择。在应用中,四种模型中的任何一个都没有检测到两个治疗臂之间的显着差异。根据该方法的HRQOL对时间的估计效果:对于所有分析的尺寸,PMM估计与SM和SPM估计的那些对比的效果; SM(四个HRQOL尺寸中的两种中的两种)和SPM(四个HRQOL尺寸中的三个)确认LMM估计效应。当疑录信息丢弃时,应使用PMM,SM或SPM确认或使LMM分析结果无效。在这三种替代方法中,SPM似乎是理论和实践观点中最有趣的。本研究以ClinicalTrials.gov注册,NCT00861094号码。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号