Planning of randomized early detection trials

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
Statistical Methods in Medical Research (Impact Factor: 4.47). 01/2005; 13(6):491-506. DOI: 10.1191/0962280204sm379ra
Source: PubMed


Consider a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the benefit of screening an asymptomatic population. Suppose that the subjects are randomized into a usual care and a study group. The study group receives one or more periodic early detection examinations aimed at diagnosing disease early, when there are no signs or symptoms. Early detection clinical trials differ from therapeutic trials in that power is affected by: i) the number of exams, ii) the time between exams and iii) the ages at which exams will be given. These design options do not exist in therapeutic trials. Furthermore; long-term follow-up may result in a reduction of power. In general, power increases with number of examinations, and the optimal follow-up time is dependent on the spacing between examinations. Clinical trials in which the usual care group receives benefit are also discussed. Two designs are discussed, for example the 'up-front design' in which all subjects receive an initial exam and then are randomized to the usual care and study groups and the 'close-out design' in which the usual care group receives an exam which is timed to be given at the same time as the last exam in the study group. Both families of designs significantly reduce the power. Power calculations are made for two clinical trials, which actually used these two designs.

0 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Results from several randomised mammography screening trials haveshown that it is possible to reduce mortalityin breast cancer by mammographic screening at leastfor women above 50 years of age. Thepurpose of this article is to present dataon mortality in breast cancer in study andcontrol groups of the Stockholm trial after 11years of followup, to analyse which age groupbenefits most from screening. In March 1981, 40,318women in Stockholm, aged 40 through 64 years,entered a randomized trial of breast cancer screeningby single view mammography alone, versus no interventionin a control group of 20 000 women.Two screening rounds were performed and the attendancerate was over 80% in the two rounds.During 1986 the control group was invited onceto screening. Totally 428 and 217 cases ofbreast cancer were diagnosed in the study andcontrol groups respectively. After a mean follow-up of11.4 years a nonsignificant mortality reduction of 26%was observed for the whole study group, witha relative risk (RR) of death in breastcancer of 0.74 (CI(confidence interval)=0.5–1.1). Forwomen aged 50–64 years a significant 38% mortalityreduction was observed with a RR of 0.62(CI=0.38–1.0). For women aged 40–49 yearsno effect on mortality was found, with aRR of death in breast cancer of 1.08(CI=0.54–2.17). The breakpoint for benefit inthis study seemed to be at 50 yearsof age when 5-year age groups were analysed,but this tendency is uncertain because of thelow statistical power in the analysis of theyounger age groups. Long screening intervals, the useof single-view mammography, and the fact that morethan 50% of the women in age group40–49 years were still below 50 years ofage when the study was closed, were allfacts that could have influenced the results inage group 40–49 years. Larger studies are neededto answer the question whether mammographic screening canbe successful in younger age groups.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 08/1997; 45(3):263-270. DOI:10.1023/A:1005872617944 · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article reviews approaches to the design and analysis of cancer screening trials. After summarizing some basic screening concepts and potential pitfalls, we introduce several possible screening trial designs with examples from the literature. We review in detail methods for analyzing screening trial data, including testing for a significant difference in disease-specific mortality between the control and intervention groups, estimating the mortality differential if one exists, and evaluating the programme lead time, the screen sensitivity and the role of stage shifting. We consider Overall mortality analyses, which are based on the experience of the trial population, and Limited mortality analyses, which are based on the experience of comparable groups of cases in the control and intervention groups. We discuss methods for selecting candidate comparable case groups and confirming that they are in fact comparable. We conclude by showing how the principles discussed have been used in the planning and design of a current screening trial for multiple cancers.
    Statistical Methods in Medical Research 04/1995; 4(1):3-17. DOI:10.1177/096228029500400102 · 4.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The lack of statistical theory for the planning of early detection trials has resulted in current trials being sub-optimal. We develop probability models that address three characteristics of early detection trials: (i) the optimal time of analysis and length of follow-up, (ii) the optimal spacing between examinations, and (iii) the planning of trials where the numbers of examinations versus sample size are balanced for fixed costs. The optimisation criterion is to maximise the power of the statistical test for comparing mortality. Application is made to breast cancer early detection trials.
    Biometrika 12/1997; 84(4). DOI:10.1093/biomet/84.4.817 · 1.42 Impact Factor