Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Coronavirus | Research article

A four-step strategy for handling missing outcome data in randomised trials affected by a pandemic

Authors: Suzie Cro, Tim P. Morris, Brennan C. Kahan, Victoria R. Cornelius, James R. Carpenter

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19) presents a variety of challenges for ongoing clinical trials, including an inevitably higher rate of missing outcome data, with new and non-standard reasons for missingness. International drug trial guidelines recommend trialists review plans for handling missing data in the conduct and statistical analysis, but clear recommendations are lacking.

Methods

We present a four-step strategy for handling missing outcome data in the analysis of randomised trials that are ongoing during a pandemic. We consider handling missing data arising due to (i) participant infection, (ii) treatment disruptions and (iii) loss to follow-up. We consider both settings where treatment effects for a ‘pandemic-free world’ and ‘world including a pandemic’ are of interest.

Results

In any trial, investigators should; (1) Clarify the treatment estimand of interest with respect to the occurrence of the pandemic; (2) Establish what data are missing for the chosen estimand; (3) Perform primary analysis under the most plausible missing data assumptions followed by; (4) Sensitivity analysis under alternative plausible assumptions. To obtain an estimate of the treatment effect in a ‘pandemic-free world’, participant data that are clinically affected by the pandemic (directly due to infection or indirectly via treatment disruptions) are not relevant and can be set to missing. For primary analysis, a missing-at-random assumption that conditions on all observed data that are expected to be associated with both the outcome and missingness may be most plausible. For the treatment effect in the ‘world including a pandemic’, all participant data is relevant and should be included in the analysis. For primary analysis, a missing-at-random assumption – potentially incorporating a pandemic time-period indicator and participant infection status – or a missing-not-at-random assumption with a poorer response may be most relevant, depending on the setting. In all scenarios, sensitivity analysis under credible missing-not-at-random assumptions should be used to evaluate the robustness of results. We highlight controlled multiple imputation as an accessible tool for conducting sensitivity analyses.

Conclusions

Missing data problems will be exacerbated for trials active during the Covid-19 pandemic. This four-step strategy will facilitate clear thinking about the appropriate analysis for relevant questions of interest.
Literature
7.
go back to reference Carpenter J, Kenward M. Missing data in randomised controlled trials: a practical guide. Birmingham: Health Technology Assessment Methodology Programme; 2007. p. 1–199. Carpenter J, Kenward M. Missing data in randomised controlled trials: a practical guide. Birmingham: Health Technology Assessment Methodology Programme; 2007. p. 1–199.
9.
go back to reference White IR, Horton NJ, Carpenter J. statistics rim, social, Pocock SJ Strategy for intention to treat analysis in randomised trials with missing outcome data. BMJ. 2011;342:d40.CrossRef White IR, Horton NJ, Carpenter J. statistics rim, social, Pocock SJ Strategy for intention to treat analysis in randomised trials with missing outcome data. BMJ. 2011;342:d40.CrossRef
12.
13.
go back to reference Banerjee PJ, Cornelius VR, Phillips R, Lo JW, Bunce C, Kelly J, et al. Adjunctive intraocular and peri-ocular steroid (triamcinolone acetonide) versus standard treatment in eyes undergoing vitreoretinal surgery for open globe trauma (ASCOT): study protocol for a phase III, multi-Centre, double-masked randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2016;17(1):339.CrossRef Banerjee PJ, Cornelius VR, Phillips R, Lo JW, Bunce C, Kelly J, et al. Adjunctive intraocular and peri-ocular steroid (triamcinolone acetonide) versus standard treatment in eyes undergoing vitreoretinal surgery for open globe trauma (ASCOT): study protocol for a phase III, multi-Centre, double-masked randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2016;17(1):339.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med. 2011;30(4):377–99.CrossRef White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med. 2011;30(4):377–99.CrossRef
17.
18.
go back to reference Carpenter JR, Roger JH, Kenward MG. Analysis of longitudinal trials with protocol deviation: a framework for relevant, accessible assumptions, and inference via multiple imputation. J Biopharm Stat. 2013;23(6):1352–71.CrossRef Carpenter JR, Roger JH, Kenward MG. Analysis of longitudinal trials with protocol deviation: a framework for relevant, accessible assumptions, and inference via multiple imputation. J Biopharm Stat. 2013;23(6):1352–71.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Kenward M. Controlled multiple imputation methods for sensitivity analyses in longitudinal clinical trials with dropout and protocol deviation. Clin Invest. 2015;5:311–20.CrossRef Kenward M. Controlled multiple imputation methods for sensitivity analyses in longitudinal clinical trials with dropout and protocol deviation. Clin Invest. 2015;5:311–20.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Rubin D. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surverys. Wiley, editor. USA: Wiley; 1987. Chapters 1–4. Rubin D. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surverys. Wiley, editor. USA: Wiley; 1987. Chapters 1–4.
21.
go back to reference Leacy FP, Floyd S, Yates TA, White IR. Analyses of sensitivity to the missing-at-random assumption using multiple imputation with Delta adjustment: application to a tuberculosis/HIV prevalence survey with incomplete HIV-status data. Am J Epidemiol. 2017;185(4):304–15.PubMedPubMedCentral Leacy FP, Floyd S, Yates TA, White IR. Analyses of sensitivity to the missing-at-random assumption using multiple imputation with Delta adjustment: application to a tuberculosis/HIV prevalence survey with incomplete HIV-status data. Am J Epidemiol. 2017;185(4):304–15.PubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Tang Y. Controlled pattern imputation for sensitivity analysis of longitudinal binary and ordinal outcomes with nonignorable dropout. Stat Med. 2018;37(9):1467–81.CrossRef Tang Y. Controlled pattern imputation for sensitivity analysis of longitudinal binary and ordinal outcomes with nonignorable dropout. Stat Med. 2018;37(9):1467–81.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Keene ON, Roger JH, Hartley BF, Kenward MG. Missing data sensitivity analysis for recurrent event data using controlled imputation. Pharm Stat. 2014;13(4):258–64.CrossRef Keene ON, Roger JH, Hartley BF, Kenward MG. Missing data sensitivity analysis for recurrent event data using controlled imputation. Pharm Stat. 2014;13(4):258–64.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Akacha M, Ogundimu EO. Sensitivity analyses for partially observed recurrent event data. Pharm Stat. 2016;15(1):4–14.CrossRef Akacha M, Ogundimu EO. Sensitivity analyses for partially observed recurrent event data. Pharm Stat. 2016;15(1):4–14.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Gao F, Liu GF, Zeng D, Xu L, Lin B, Diao G, et al. Control-based imputation for sensitivity analyses in informative censoring for recurrent event data. Pharm Stat. 2017;16(6):424–32.CrossRef Gao F, Liu GF, Zeng D, Xu L, Lin B, Diao G, et al. Control-based imputation for sensitivity analyses in informative censoring for recurrent event data. Pharm Stat. 2017;16(6):424–32.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Jackson D, White IR, Seaman S, Evans H, Baisley K, Carpenter J. Relaxing the independent censoring assumption in the cox proportional hazards model using multiple imputation. Stat Med. 2014;33(27):4681–94.CrossRef Jackson D, White IR, Seaman S, Evans H, Baisley K, Carpenter J. Relaxing the independent censoring assumption in the cox proportional hazards model using multiple imputation. Stat Med. 2014;33(27):4681–94.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Atkinson A, Kenward MG, Clayton T, Carpenter JR. Reference-based sensitivity analysis for time-to-event data. Pharm Stat. 2019;18(6):645–58.CrossRef Atkinson A, Kenward MG, Clayton T, Carpenter JR. Reference-based sensitivity analysis for time-to-event data. Pharm Stat. 2019;18(6):645–58.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Lu K, Li D, Koch GG. Comparison between two controlled multiple imputation methods for sensitivity analyses of time-to-event data with possibly informative censoring. Stat Biopharm Res. 2015;7(3):199–213.CrossRef Lu K, Li D, Koch GG. Comparison between two controlled multiple imputation methods for sensitivity analyses of time-to-event data with possibly informative censoring. Stat Biopharm Res. 2015;7(3):199–213.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Lipkovich I, Ratitch B, O'Kelly M. Sensitivity to censored-at-random assumption in the analysis of time-to-event endpoints. Pharm Stat. 2016;15(3):216–29.CrossRef Lipkovich I, Ratitch B, O'Kelly M. Sensitivity to censored-at-random assumption in the analysis of time-to-event endpoints. Pharm Stat. 2016;15(3):216–29.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Cro S, Carpenter JR, Kenward MG. Information-anchored sensitivity analysis: theory and application. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2019;182(2):623–45.CrossRef Cro S, Carpenter JR, Kenward MG. Information-anchored sensitivity analysis: theory and application. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2019;182(2):623–45.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Morris TP, Kahan BC, White IR. Choosing sensitivity analyses for randomised trials: principles. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):11.CrossRef Morris TP, Kahan BC, White IR. Choosing sensitivity analyses for randomised trials: principles. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):11.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Latimer N, KRA. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 16: Adjusting survival time estimates in the presence of treatment switching. 2014. Available from http://www.nicedsu.org.uk. Accessed 6 July 2020. Latimer N, KRA. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 16: Adjusting survival time estimates in the presence of treatment switching. 2014. Available from http://​www.​nicedsu.​org.​uk. Accessed 6 July 2020.
34.
go back to reference Dunn G, Bentall R. Modelling treatment-effect heterogeneity in randomized controlled trials of complex interventions (psychological treatments). Stat Med. 2007;26(26):4719–45.CrossRef Dunn G, Bentall R. Modelling treatment-effect heterogeneity in randomized controlled trials of complex interventions (psychological treatments). Stat Med. 2007;26(26):4719–45.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Hernán MA, Robins JM. Instruments for causal inference: an epidemiologist's dream? Epidemiology. 2006;17(4):360–72.CrossRef Hernán MA, Robins JM. Instruments for causal inference: an epidemiologist's dream? Epidemiology. 2006;17(4):360–72.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference White IR, Babiker AG, Walker S, Darbyshire JH. Randomization-based methods for correcting for treatment changes: examples from the Concorde trial. Stat Med. 1999;18(19):2617–34.CrossRef White IR, Babiker AG, Walker S, Darbyshire JH. Randomization-based methods for correcting for treatment changes: examples from the Concorde trial. Stat Med. 1999;18(19):2617–34.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Dunn G, Emsley R, Liu H, et al. Evaluation and validation of social and psychological markers in randomised trials of complex interventions in mental health: a methodological research programme. Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(93):1–115. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta19930. Dunn G, Emsley R, Liu H, et al. Evaluation and validation of social and psychological markers in randomised trials of complex interventions in mental health: a methodological research programme. Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(93):1–115. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3310/​hta19930.
Metadata
Title
A four-step strategy for handling missing outcome data in randomised trials affected by a pandemic
Authors
Suzie Cro
Tim P. Morris
Brennan C. Kahan
Victoria R. Cornelius
James R. Carpenter
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01089-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2020 Go to the issue