Controlled evaLuation of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers for COVID-19 respIraTorY disease (CLARITY): statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled Bayesian adaptive sample size trial

J M McGree, C Hockham, S Kotwal, A Wilcox, A Bassi, C Pollock, L M Burrell, T Snelling, V Jha, M Jardine, M Jones, CLARITY Trial Steering Committee, J M McGree, C Hockham, S Kotwal, A Wilcox, A Bassi, C Pollock, L M Burrell, T Snelling, V Jha, M Jardine, M Jones, CLARITY Trial Steering Committee

Abstract

The CLARITY trial (Controlled evaLuation of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers for COVID-19 respIraTorY disease) is a two-arm, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial being run in India and Australia that investigates the effectiveness of angiotensin receptor blockers in addition to standard care compared to placebo (in Indian sites) with standard care in reducing the duration and severity of lung failure in patients with COVID-19. The trial was designed as a Bayesian adaptive sample size trial with regular planned analyses where pre-specified decision rules will be assessed to determine whether the trial should be stopped due to sufficient evidence of treatment effectiveness or futility. Here, we describe the statistical analysis plan for the trial and define the pre-specified decision rules, including those that could lead to the trial being halted. The primary outcome is clinical status on a 7-point ordinal scale adapted from the WHO Clinical Progression scale assessed at day 14. The primary analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. A Bayesian adaptive trial design was selected because there is considerable uncertainty about the extent of potential benefit of this treatment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04394117 . Registered on 19 May 2020Clinical Trial Registry of India CTRI/2020/07/026831Version and revisionsVersion 1.0. No revisions.

Keywords: Adaptive sample size; Angiotensin receptor blockers; Bayesian design; Clinical trial; Coronavirus; Protocol; Statistical analysis plan.

Conflict of interest statement

JM, CH, SK, AW, AB, LB, NB, MK, VR, MJoh, EL, AR, AM, TS and MJon have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

CP serves on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp and Dohme and Novartis.

CJ serves on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis and Sanofi-Genzyme.

VJ has received grants from Baxter Healthcare, Biocon and GlaxoSmithKline, and speaker fees/advisory board from AstraZeneca, Baxter Healthcare, NephroPlus, Sanofi — all outside the submitted work. All fees paid to the organisation.

MJar is responsible for research projects that have received unrestricted funding from Amgen, Baxter, Bayer, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly, Gambro, and Merck Sharp and Dohme; has served on advisory boards sponsored by Akebia, AstraZeneca, Baxter, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp and Dohme and Vifor; serves on the Steering Committee for trials sponsored by Chinook, CSL Behring and Janssen; serves on a Steering Committee for an investigator initiated trial in COVID-19 disease with funding support from Dimerix; spoken at scientific meetings sponsored by Amgen, Janssen, Roche and Vifor; with any consultancy, honoraria or travel support paid to the institution.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Trial overview and participant schedule [11]
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Distribution of the posterior mean of β based on 1000 simulated data sets for a given number of enrolments and odds ratios of a 1.00, b 0.95, c 0.87 and d 0.80
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Estimated probability of the trial stopping for a effectiveness, b futility and c average sample sizes based on a variety of different assumptions about the odds ratio, recruitment rate and data that will be observed
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Empirical hazard function for patients with COVID-19 based on data from the Recovery trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Proposed hazard functions for simulation study
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Approximate power for given sample sizes for ψ=0.87 and the a empirical hazard function, b exponential hazard function λ=1/26 and c Weibull hazard function γ=0.8,λ=1/26 when the semi-parametric (−) and Weibull (− −) regression models were refit to the simulated data

References

    1. Hoffmann M, Kleine-Weber H, Schroeder S, Kruger N, Herrler T, Erichsen S, Schiergens TS, Herrler G, Wu NH, Nitsche A, Muller MA, Drosten C, Pohlmann S. SARS-CoV-2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell. 2020;181:271–80. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052.
    1. Lan J, Ge J, Yu J, Zhou SS, Zhang SF, Shi X, Wang Q, Zhang L, Wang X. Structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor-binding domain bound to the ACE2 receptor. Nature. 2020;581:215–20. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2180-5.
    1. Ramchand J, Burrell LM. Circulating ACE2: a novel biomarker of cardiovascular risk. Lancet. 2020;396:937–9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32011-0.
    1. Patel SK, Juno JA, Lee WS, Wragg KM, Hogarth PM, Kent SJ, Burrell LM. Plasma ACE2 activity is persistently elevated following SARS-CoV-2 infection: implications for COVID-19 pathogenesis and consequences. Eur Respir J. 2021;57:2003730. doi: 10.1183/13993003.03730-2020.
    1. Deshotels MR, Xia H, Sriramula S, Lazartigues E, Filipeanu CM. Angiotensin II mediates angiotensin converting enzyme type 2 internalization and degradation through an angiotensin II type I receptor-dependent mechanism. Hypertension. 2014;64:1368–75. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.03743.
    1. Kuba K, Imai Y, Rao S, Gao H, Guo F, Guan B, Huan Y, Yang P, Zhang Y, Deng W, Bao L, Zhang B, Liu G, Wang Z, Chappell M, Liu Y, Zheng D, Leibbrandt A, Wada T, Slutsky AS, Liu D, Qin C, Jiang C, Penninger JM. A crucial role of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) in SARS coronavirus–induced lung injury. Nat Med. 2005;11:875–9. doi: 10.1038/nm1267.
    1. Gamble C, Krishan A, Stocken D, Lewis S, Juszczak E, Doré C, Williamson PR, Altman DG, Montgomery A, Lim P, Berlin J, Senn S, Day S, Barbachano Y, Loder E. Guidelines for the content of statistical analysis plans in clinical trials. J Am Med Assoc. 2017;318:2337–43. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.18556.
    1. Dimairo M, Coates E, Pallmann P, Todd S, Julious SA, Jaki T, Wason J, Mander AP, Weir CJ, Koenig F, Walton MK, Biggs K, Nicholl J, Hamasaki T, Proschan MA, Scott JA, Ando Y, Hind D, Altman DG. Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design. BMC Med. 2018;16:210. doi: 10.1186/s12916-018-1196-2.
    1. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:869. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c869.
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, the CONSORT Group CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med. 2010;8:18. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-8-18.
    1. Hockham C, Kotwal S, Wilcox A, Bassi A, McGree J, Pollock C, Burrell LM, Bathla N, Kunigari M, Rathore V, John M, Lin E, Jenkins C, Ritchie A, McLachlan A, Snelling T, Jones M, Jha V, Jardine M. Protocol for the Controlled evaLuation of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers for COVID-19 respIraTorY disease (CLARITY): a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2021;22:573. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05521-0.
    1. Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey; 2004.
    1. Ma Z, Chen G. Bayesian methods for dealing with missing data problems. J Korean Stat Soc. 2018;47:297–313. doi: 10.1016/j.jkss.2018.03.002.
    1. WHO Working Group on the Clinical Characterisation and Management of COVID-19 infection A minimal common outcome measure set for COVID-19 clinical research. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20:192–7. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30483-7.
    1. Metropolis N, Rosenbluth AW, Rosenbluth MN, Teller AH, Teller E. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys. 1953;21:1087–92. doi: 10.1063/1.1699114.
    1. Hastings WK. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika. 1970;57:97–109. doi: 10.1093/biomet/57.1.97.
    1. Girolami M, Calderhead B. Riemann manifold Langevin and Hamiltonian Monte Carlo methods. J R Stat Soc Ser B. 2011;73:123–214. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2010.00765.x.
    1. Vehtari A, Gelman A, Gabry J. Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Stat Comput. 2017;27:1413–32. doi: 10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4.
    1. Gelman A, Rubin DB. Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Stat Sci. 1992;7:457–72.
    1. Carpenter B, Gelman A, Hoffman MD, Lee D, Goodrich B, Betancourt M, Brubaker M, Guo J, Li P, Riddell A. Stan: a probabilistic programming language. J Stat Softw. 2017;76:10–1863707601. doi: 10.18637/jss.v076.i01.
    1. McCullagh P. Regression Models for Ordinal Data. J R Stat Soc Ser B. 1980;42:109–42.
    1. Marschner IC. Estimating age-specific COVID-19 fatality risk and time to death by comparing population diagnosis and death patterns: Australian data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21:126. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01314-w.
    1. Williamson EJ, Walker AJ, Bhaskaran K, Bacon S, Bates C, Morton CE, Curtis HJ, Mehrkar A, Evans D, Inglesby P, Cockburn J, McDonald HI, MacKenna B, Tomlinson L, Douglas IJ, Rentsch CT, Mathur R, Wong A, Grieve R, Harrison D, Forbes H, Schultze A, Croker R, Parry J, Hester F, Harper S, Perera R, Evans S, Smeeth L, Goldacre B. Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY. Nature. 2020;584:430–6. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2521-4.
    1. Peters S, MacMahon S, Woodward M. Obesity as a risk factor for COVID-19 mortality in women and men in the UK biobank: comparisons with influenza/pneumonia and coronary heart disease. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021;23:258–62. doi: 10.1111/dom.14199.
    1. Berry SM, Carlin BP, Lee JJ, Muller P. Bayesian adaptive methods for clinical trials, 2nd ed: Chapman & Hall/CRC Biostatistics Series; 2010.
    1. Gelman A, Simpson D, Betancourt M. The prior can often only be understood in the context of the likelihood. Entropy. 2017;19(10):555. doi: 10.3390/e19100555.
    1. Agesti A. Analysis of ordinal categorical data, 2nd ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2010.
    1. Prentice RL, Kalbfeisch JD, Peterson Jr. AV, Flournoy N, Farewell VT, Breslow NE. The analysis of failure times in the presence of competing risks. Biometrics. 1978;34:541–54. doi: 10.2307/2530374.
    1. Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496–509. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1999.10474144.
    1. Dixon DO, Simon R. Bayesian subset analysis. Biometrics. 1991;47:871–81. doi: 10.2307/2532645.
    1. Lindley DV. Approximate Bayesian methods. In: Bernardo JM, DeGroot MH, Lindley DV, Smith AFM, editors. Bayesian Statistics: Proceedings of the First International Meeting held in Valencia (Spain), May 28 to June 2, 1979. Valencia: Valencia University Press; 1980.
    1. Overstall AM, McGree JM, Drovandi CC. An approach for finding fully Bayesian optimal designs using normal-based approximations to loss functions. Stat Comput. 2018;28(2):343–58. doi: 10.1007/s11222-017-9734-x.
    1. Senarathne S, Overstall AM, McGree JM. Bayesian adaptive n-of-1 trials for estimating population and individual treatment effects. Stat Med. 2020;39:4499–518. doi: 10.1002/sim.8737.
    1. Whitehead J. Sample size calculation for ordered categorical data. Stat Med. 1993;12:2257–71. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780122404.
    1. Summary of recommendation statements. Kidney international supplements. 2012; 2(1):8–12. 10.1038/kisup.2012.7.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever