Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Study protocol

Interactions in the 2×2×2 factorial randomised clinical STEPCARE trial and the potential effects on conclusions: a protocol for a simulation study

Authors: Markus Harboe Olsen, Aksel Karl Georg Jensen, Josef Dankiewicz, Markus B. Skrifvars, Matti Reinikainen, Marjaana Tiainen, Manoj Saxena, Anders Aneman, Christian Gluud, Susann Ullén, Niklas Nielsen, Janus Christian Jakobsen

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Randomised clinical trials with a factorial design may assess the effects of multiple interventions in the same population. Factorial trials are carried out under the assumption that the trial interventions have no interactions on outcomes. Here, we present a protocol for a simulation study investigating the consequences of different levels of interactions between the trial interventions on outcomes for the future 2×2×2 factorial designed randomised clinical Sedation, TEmperature, and Pressure after Cardiac Arrest and REsuscitation (STEPCARE) trial in comatose patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Methods

By simulating a multisite trial with 50 sites and 3278 participants, and a presumed six-month all-cause mortality of 60% in the control population, we will investigate the validity of the trial results with different levels of interaction effects on the outcome. The primary simulation outcome of the study is the risks of type-1 and type-2 errors in the simulated scenarios, i.e. at what level of interaction is the desired alpha and beta level exceeded. When keeping the overall risk of type-1 errors ≤ 5% and the risk of type-2 errors ≤ 10%, we will quantify the maximum interaction effect we can accept if the planned sample size is increased by 5% to take into account possible interaction between the trial interventions. Secondly, we will assess how interaction effects influence the minimal detectable difference we may confirm or reject to take into account 5% (small interaction effect), 10% (moderate), or 15% (large) positive interactions in simulations with no ‘true’ intervention effect (type-1 errors) and small (5%), moderate (10%), or large negative interactions (15%) in simulations with ‘true’ intervention effects (type-2 errors). Moreover, we will investigate how much the sample size must be increased to account for a small, moderate, or large interaction effects.

Discussion

This protocol for a simulation study will inform the design of a 2×2×2 factorial randomised clinical trial of how potential interactions between the assessed interventions might affect conclusions. Protocolising this simulation study is important to ensure valid and unbiased results.

Trial registration

Not relevant
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Granholm A, Alhazzani W, Derde LPG, Angus DC, Zampieri FG, Hammond NE, et al. Randomised clinical trials in critical care: past, present and future. Intensive Care Med. 2022;48:164–78.CrossRef Granholm A, Alhazzani W, Derde LPG, Angus DC, Zampieri FG, Hammond NE, et al. Randomised clinical trials in critical care: past, present and future. Intensive Care Med. 2022;48:164–78.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Montgomery AA, Peters TJ, Little P. Design, analysis and presentation of factorial randomised controlled trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:26.CrossRef Montgomery AA, Peters TJ, Little P. Design, analysis and presentation of factorial randomised controlled trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:26.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators, Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY-S, Blair D, Foster D, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1283–97.CrossRef NICE-SUGAR Study Investigators, Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY-S, Blair D, Foster D, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1283–97.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Cooper DJ, Rosenfeld JV, Murray L, Arabi YM, Davies AR, D’Urso P, et al. Decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1493–502.CrossRef Cooper DJ, Rosenfeld JV, Murray L, Arabi YM, Davies AR, D’Urso P, et al. Decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1493–502.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, Verwaest C, Bruyninckx F, Schetz M, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1359–67.CrossRef van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, Verwaest C, Bruyninckx F, Schetz M, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1359–67.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Dankiewicz J, Cronberg T, Lilja G, Jakobsen JC, Levin H, Ullén S, et al. Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:2283–94.CrossRef Dankiewicz J, Cronberg T, Lilja G, Jakobsen JC, Levin H, Ullén S, et al. Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:2283–94.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Parke RL, McGuinness S, Eastwood GM, Nichol A, Nielsen N, Dankiewicz J, et al. Co-enrolment for the TAME and TTM-2 trials: the cerebral option. Crit Care Resusc. 2017;19:99–100.PubMed Parke RL, McGuinness S, Eastwood GM, Nichol A, Nielsen N, Dankiewicz J, et al. Co-enrolment for the TAME and TTM-2 trials: the cerebral option. Crit Care Resusc. 2017;19:99–100.PubMed
8.
go back to reference Jakkula P, Pettilä V, Skrifvars MB, Hästbacka J, Loisa P, Tiainen M, et al. Targeting low-normal or high-normal mean arterial pressure after cardiac arrest and resuscitation: a randomised pilot trial. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44:2091–101.CrossRef Jakkula P, Pettilä V, Skrifvars MB, Hästbacka J, Loisa P, Tiainen M, et al. Targeting low-normal or high-normal mean arterial pressure after cardiac arrest and resuscitation: a randomised pilot trial. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44:2091–101.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Jakkula P, Reinikainen M, Hästbacka J, Loisa P, Tiainen M, Pettilä V, et al. Targeting two different levels of both arterial carbon dioxide and arterial oxygen after cardiac arrest and resuscitation: a randomised pilot trial. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44:2112–21.CrossRef Jakkula P, Reinikainen M, Hästbacka J, Loisa P, Tiainen M, Pettilä V, et al. Targeting two different levels of both arterial carbon dioxide and arterial oxygen after cardiac arrest and resuscitation: a randomised pilot trial. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44:2112–21.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Smith MK, Marshall A. Importance of protocols for simulation studies in clinical drug development. Stat Methods Med Res. 2011;20:613–22.CrossRef Smith MK, Marshall A. Importance of protocols for simulation studies in clinical drug development. Stat Methods Med Res. 2011;20:613–22.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Gamble C, Krishan A, Stocken D, Lewis S, Juszczak E, Doré C, et al. Guidelines for the Content of Statistical Analysis Plans in Clinical Trials. JAMA. 2017;318:2337–43.CrossRef Gamble C, Krishan A, Stocken D, Lewis S, Juszczak E, Doré C, et al. Guidelines for the Content of Statistical Analysis Plans in Clinical Trials. JAMA. 2017;318:2337–43.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hiemstra B, Keus F, Wetterslev J, Gluud C, van der Horst ICC. DEBATE-statistical analysis plans for observational studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19:233.CrossRef Hiemstra B, Keus F, Wetterslev J, Gluud C, van der Horst ICC. DEBATE-statistical analysis plans for observational studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19:233.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Morris TP, White IR, Crowther MJ. Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods; 2019.CrossRef Morris TP, White IR, Crowther MJ. Using simulation studies to evaluate statistical methods; 2019.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Nielsen N, Wetterslev J, Cronberg T, Erlinge D, Gasche Y, Hassager C, et al. Targeted temperature management at 33°C versus 36°C after cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2197–206.CrossRef Nielsen N, Wetterslev J, Cronberg T, Erlinge D, Gasche Y, Hassager C, et al. Targeted temperature management at 33°C versus 36°C after cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2197–206.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Koehler E, Brown E, Haneuse SJ-PA. On the Assessment of Monte Carlo Error in Simulation-Based Statistical Analyses. Am Stat. 2009;63:155–62.CrossRef Koehler E, Brown E, Haneuse SJ-PA. On the Assessment of Monte Carlo Error in Simulation-Based Statistical Analyses. Am Stat. 2009;63:155–62.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Holford N, Ma SC, Ploeger BA. Clinical trial simulation: a review. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010;88:166–82 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.CrossRef Holford N, Ma SC, Ploeger BA. Clinical trial simulation: a review. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010;88:166–82 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Smith H, Sweeting M, Morris T, Crowther MJ. A scoping methodological review of simulation studies comparing statistical and machine learning approaches to risk prediction for time-to-event data. Diagnostic Progn Res. 2022;6:10.CrossRef Smith H, Sweeting M, Morris T, Crowther MJ. A scoping methodological review of simulation studies comparing statistical and machine learning approaches to risk prediction for time-to-event data. Diagnostic Progn Res. 2022;6:10.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67:1–48.CrossRef Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67:1–48.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Wason JMS, Stecher L, Mander AP. Correcting for multiple-testing in multi-arm trials: is it necessary and is it done? Trials. 2014;15:364.CrossRef Wason JMS, Stecher L, Mander AP. Correcting for multiple-testing in multi-arm trials: is it necessary and is it done? Trials. 2014;15:364.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Félix V, Menezes A. Comparisons of ten corrections methods for t-test in multiple comparisons via Monte Carlo study. Electron J Appl Stat Anal. 2018;11:74–91. Félix V, Menezes A. Comparisons of ten corrections methods for t-test in multiple comparisons via Monte Carlo study. Electron J Appl Stat Anal. 2018;11:74–91.
22.
go back to reference Nørskov AK, Lange T, Nielsen EE, Gluud C, Winkel P, Beyersmann J, et al. Assessment of assumptions of statistical analysis methods in randomised clinical trials: the what and how. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2021;26:121–6.CrossRef Nørskov AK, Lange T, Nielsen EE, Gluud C, Winkel P, Beyersmann J, et al. Assessment of assumptions of statistical analysis methods in randomised clinical trials: the what and how. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2021;26:121–6.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Kim H-Y. Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Type I and type II errors in statistical decision. Restor Dent Endod. 2015;40:249–52.CrossRef Kim H-Y. Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Type I and type II errors in statistical decision. Restor Dent Endod. 2015;40:249–52.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Jaki T, Vasileiou D. Factorial versus multi-arm multi-stage designs for clinical trials with multiple treatments. Stat Med. 2017;36:563–80.CrossRef Jaki T, Vasileiou D. Factorial versus multi-arm multi-stage designs for clinical trials with multiple treatments. Stat Med. 2017;36:563–80.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Head ML, Holman L, Lanfear R, Kahn AT, Jennions MD. The extent and consequences of p-hacking in science. PLoS Biol. 2015;13:e1002106.CrossRef Head ML, Holman L, Lanfear R, Kahn AT, Jennions MD. The extent and consequences of p-hacking in science. PLoS Biol. 2015;13:e1002106.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Interactions in the 2×2×2 factorial randomised clinical STEPCARE trial and the potential effects on conclusions: a protocol for a simulation study
Authors
Markus Harboe Olsen
Aksel Karl Georg Jensen
Josef Dankiewicz
Markus B. Skrifvars
Matti Reinikainen
Marjaana Tiainen
Manoj Saxena
Anders Aneman
Christian Gluud
Susann Ullén
Niklas Nielsen
Janus Christian Jakobsen
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06796-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Trials 1/2022 Go to the issue