Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34080077›Full record

Trial reportThe AAPS journal2021

Improved Decision-Making Confidence Using Item-Based Pharmacometric Model: Illustration with a Phase II Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Carolina Llanos-Paez, Claire Ambery, Shuying Yang, Maggie Tabberer, Misba Beerahee, Elodie L Plan, Mats O Karlsson

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The AAPS journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Carolina Llanos-PaezDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Box 580, 751 23, Uppsala, Sweden.
Claire AmberyClinical Pharmacology Modelling and Simulation, GlaxoSmithKline plc, London, UK.
Shuying YangClinical Pharmacology Modelling and Simulation, GlaxoSmithKline plc, London, UK.
Maggie TabbererPatient Centred Outcomes: Value Evidence and Outcomes, GlaxoSmithKline plc, Brentford, Middlesex, UK.
Misba BeeraheeClinical Pharmacology Modelling and Simulation, GlaxoSmithKline plc, London, UK.
Elodie L PlanDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Box 580, 751 23, Uppsala, Sweden.
Mats O KarlssonDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Box 580, 751 23, Uppsala, Sweden. mats.karlsson@farmaci.uu.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to illustrate how a new methodology to assess clinical trial outcome measures using a longitudinal item response theory-based model (IRM) could serve as an alternative to mixed model repeated measures (MMRM). Data from the EXACT (Exacerbation of chronic pulmonary disease tool) which is used to capture frequency, severity, and duration of exacerbations in COPD were analyzed using an IRM. The IRM included a graded response model characterizing item parameters and functions describing symptom-time course. Total scores were simulated (month 12) using uncertainty in parameter estimates. The 50th (2.5th, 97.5th) percentiles of the resulting simulated differences in average total score (drug minus placebo) represented the estimated drug effect (95%CI), which was compared with published MMRM results. Furthermore, differences in sample size, sensitivity, specificity, and type I and II errors between approaches were explored. Patients received either oral danirixin 75 mg twice daily (n = 45) or placebo (n = 48) on top of standard of care over 52 weeks. A step function best described the COPD symptoms-time course in both trial arms. The IRM improved precision of the estimated drug effect compared to MMRM, resulting in a sample size of 2.5 times larger for the MMRM analysis to achieve the IRM precision. The IRM showed a higher probability of a positive predictive value (34%) than MMRM (22%). An item model-based analysis data gave more precise estimates of drug effect than MMRM analysis for the same endpoint in this one case study.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalResearch DesignAdministration, OralAgedData Interpretation, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPiperidinesPlacebosPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveSample SizeSeverity of Illness IndexSulfonesSymptom Flare UpdanirixinPiperidinesPlacebosSulfonesEXACTItem response theoryMixed-effects model repeated measuresNon-linear-mixed-effects modelsPower comparison

Identifiers

PMID34080077
PMCPMC8172506

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.