ArticleStatistics in medicine2025
Group-Sequential Designs With an Externally-Driven Change of Primary Endpoint.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Group-Sequential Designs With an Externally-Driven Change of Primary Endpoint.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical trials conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the value of adaptive design methods in emerging disease settings, when there can be considerable uncertainty around disease natural history, anticipated endpoint effect sizes and population size. In such settings, there may also be uncertainty regarding the most appropriate primary endpoint. This might lead to an externally-driven decision to change the primary endpoint during the course of an adaptive trial. If information on the new primary endpoint is already being collected, initially as a secondary endpoint, the trial could continue with a new primary endpoint. In this case it is unclear how statistical inference on the final primary endpoint should be adjusted for interim analyses monitoring the initial primary endpoint so as to control the overall type I error rate as adjusting for monitoring as if this was based on the new endpoint could be conservative whereas failing to make any adjustment could lead to type I error rate inflation if the new and original endpoint are correlated. This paper shows how group-sequential methods can be modified to control the type I error rate for the analysis of the new primary endpoint irrespective of the true treatment effect on the initial primary endpoint. The method is illustrated using a simulated data example based on a clinical trial of remdesivir in COVID-19. Construction of critical values for the test of the new primary endpoint require a value for the correlation between this and the initial primary endpoint. We present simulation studies to demonstrate that the type I error rate is controlled when this value is estimated from the data on the two endpoints obtained from the trial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.