Bayesian methods to determine performance differences and to quantify variability among centers in multi-center trials: the IHAST trial

Emine O Bayman, Kathryn M Chaloner, Bradley J Hindman, Michael M Todd, IHAST Investigators

Abstract

Background: To quantify the variability among centers and to identify centers whose performance are potentially outside of normal variability in the primary outcome and to propose a guideline that they are outliers.

Methods: Novel statistical methodology using a Bayesian hierarchical model is used. Bayesian methods for estimation and outlier detection are applied assuming an additive random center effect on the log odds of response: centers are similar but different (exchangeable). The Intraoperative Hypothermia for Aneurysm Surgery Trial (IHAST) is used as an example. Analyses were adjusted for treatment, age, gender, aneurysm location, World Federation of Neurological Surgeons scale, Fisher score and baseline NIH stroke scale scores. Adjustments for differences in center characteristics were also examined. Graphical and numerical summaries of the between-center standard deviation (sd) and variability, as well as the identification of potential outliers are implemented.

Results: In the IHAST, the center-to-center variation in the log odds of favorable outcome at each center is consistent with a normal distribution with posterior sd of 0.538 (95% credible interval: 0.397 to 0.726) after adjusting for the effects of important covariates. Outcome differences among centers show no outlying centers. Four potential outlying centers were identified but did not meet the proposed guideline for declaring them as outlying. Center characteristics (number of subjects enrolled from the center, geographical location, learning over time, nitrous oxide, and temporary clipping use) did not predict outcome, but subject and disease characteristics did.

Conclusions: Bayesian hierarchical methods allow for determination of whether outcomes from a specific center differ from others and whether specific clinical practices predict outcome, even when some centers/subgroups have relatively small sample sizes. In the IHAST no outlying centers were found. The estimated variability between centers was moderately large.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00029133.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Funnel plot, frequentist, no adjustment for other covariates.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Posterior mean and 95% CIs of center log odds of good outcome (GOS = 1) for each center are presented under the final model. Posterior center log odds of good outcome greater than 0 indicates more good outcomes are observed in that center. Horizontal lines show ± s, ±2 s and ±3 s, where s is the posterior mean of the between-center standard deviation (s = 0.538, 95% CI: 0.397 to 0.726). Centers are ordered by enrollment size.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The posterior density plot of the between-center standard deviation, σe,for 15 models with variables selected from treatment, age, gender, perioperative WFNS score, baseline NIHHS score, history of hypertension, Fisher grade on CT scan, aneurysm location, aneurysm size, interval from SAH to surgery, and center.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The probability density function for σeand 95% prior probability interval.

References

    1. Canner PL, Huang YB, Meinert CL. On the detection of outlier clinics in medical and surgical trials: I. practical considerations. Control Clin Trials. 1981;2:231–240. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(81)90013-1.
    1. Spiegelhalter DJ. Funnel plots for comparing institutional performance. Stat Med. 2005;24(8):1185–1202. doi: 10.1002/sim.1970.
    1. Chaloner KA. Bayesian approach to the estimation of variance components for the unbalanced one-way random model. Technometrics. 1987;29(3):323–337. doi: 10.1080/00401706.1987.10488242.
    1. Todd MM, Hindman BJ, Clarke WR, Torner JC. Mild intraoperative hypothermia during surgery for intracranial aneurysm. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:135–145. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040975.
    1. McGregor DG, Lanier WL, Pasternak JJ, Rusy DA, Hogan K, Samra S, Hindman BJ, Todd MM. Effect of nitrous oxide on neurological and neuropsychological function following intracranial aneurysm surgery. Anesthesiology. 2008;108:568–579. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31816721fa.
    1. Hindman BJ, Bayman EO, Pfisterer WK, Torner JC, Todd MM. No association between intraoperative hypothermia or supplemental protective drug and neurologic outcomes in patients undergoing temporary clipping during cerebral aneurysm surgery: findings from the Intraoperative Hypothermia for Aneurysm Surgery Trial. Anesthesiology. 2010;112:86–101. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181c5e28f.
    1. Coghlan LA, Hindman BJ, Bayman EO, Banki NM, Gelb AW, Todd MM, Zaroff JG. Independent associations between electrocardiographic abnormalities and outcomes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Findings from the intraoperative hypothermia aneurysm surgery trial. Stroke. 2009;40:412–418. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.528778.
    1. Todd MM, Hindman BJ, Clarke WR, Torner JC, Weeks JB, Bayman EO, Shi Q, Spofford CM. Perioperative fever and outcome in surgical patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery. 2009;64:897–908. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000341903.11527.2F.
    1. Nguyen HP, Zaroff JG, Bayman EO, Gelb AW, Todd MM, Hindman BJ. Perioperative hypothermia (33 degrees C) does not increase the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients undergoing cerebral aneurysm surgery: findings from the Intraoperative Hypothermia for Aneurysm Surgery Trial. Anesthesiology. 2010;113:327–342. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181dfd4f7.
    1. The Publications Committee for the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) Investigators. Low molecular weight heparinoid, ORG 10172 (Danaparoid), and outcome after acute ischemic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc. 1998;279:1265–1272. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.16.1265.
    1. Berry DA. Clinical trials: Is the Bayesian approach ready for prime time? Yes! Stroke. 2005;36:1621–1622. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000170637.02692.14.
    1. Howard G, Coffey CS, Cutter GR. Is Bayesian analysis ready for use in phase III randomized clinical trials? Beware the sound of sirens. Stroke. 2005;36:1622–1623. doi: 10.1161/.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health. USA. Guidance for the use of Bayesian statistics in medical device clinical trials. February 5, 2010. Available from: Accessed on October 1 2012.
    1. Spiegelhalter DJ, Abrams KR, Myles JP. Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health-care evaluation. England: John Wiley & Sons; 2004.
    1. Fedorov V, Jones B. The design of multicenter trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 2005;14:205–248. doi: 10.1191/0962280205sm399oa.
    1. Ntzoufras I. Bayesian Modeling Using WinBUGS. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
    1. Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc. 1996;58(1):267–288.
    1. Spiegelhalter D, Best N, Carlin B, van der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit (with discussion) J R Statistics Soc Ser B. 2002;64:583–639. doi: 10.1111/1467-9868.00353.
    1. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB. Bayesian data analysis. 2. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2004.
    1. Bayman EO, Chaloner K, Cowles MK. Detecting qualitative interaction: A Bayesian approach. Stat Med. 2010;29:455–463.
    1. Chaloner K. In: Aspects of Uncertainty A Tribute to D. V. Lindley. Freeman PR, Smith AFM, editor. John Wiley and Sons; 1994. Residual analysis and outliers in Bayesian hierarchical models; pp. 149–157.
    1. Chaloner K, Brant R. A Bayesian approach to outlier detection and residual analysis. Biometrika. 1988;75:651–659. doi: 10.1093/biomet/75.4.651.
    1. Wicks RT, Pradilla G, Raza SM, Hadelsberg U, Coon AL, Huang J, Tamargo RJ. Impact of changes in intraoperative somato-sensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) on stroke rates after clipping of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 2012;70(5):1114–1124. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31823f5cf7.
    1. R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing, R Foundation for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: The R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2010. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Available Accessed on October 1 2012.
    1. Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS-A Bayesian modeling framework: concepts, structure and extensibility. Stat Comput. 2000;10:325–337. doi: 10.1023/A:1008929526011.
    1. Brooks SP, Gelman A. General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat. 1998;7:434–455.
    1. Agresti A, Hartzel J. Strategies for comparing treatments on a binary response with multi-centre data. Stat Med. 2000;19:1115–1139. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(20000430)19:8<1115::AID-SIM408>;2-X.
    1. Dippel D, Vermeulen M, Braakman R, Habbema JD. Transient ischemic attacks, carotid stenosis, and an incidental intracranial aneurysm. A decision analysis. Neurosurgery. 1994;34:449–458. doi: 10.1227/00006123-199403000-00010.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner