Platform trials offer a framework to study multiple interventions in a single trial with the opportunity of opening and closing arms. The use of a common control in platform trials can increase efficiency as compared to individual control arms or separate trials per treatment. However, the need for multiplicity adjustment as a consequence of common controls is currently a controversial debate among researchers, pharmaceutical companies, as well as regulators. We investigate the impact of a common control arm in platform trials on the type one error and power in comparison to what would have been obtained with a platform trial with individual control arms in a simulation study. Furthermore, we evaluate the impact on power in case multiplicity adjustment is required in a platform trial. In both study designs, the family-wise error rate (FWER) is inflated compared to a standard, two-armed randomized controlled trial when no multiplicity adjustment is applied. In case of a common control, the FWER inflation is smaller. In most circumstances, a platform trial with a common control is still beneficial in terms of sample size and power after multiplicity adjustment, whereas in some cases, the platform trial with a common control loses the efficiency gain. Therefore, we further discuss the need for adjustment in terms of a family definition or hypotheses dependencies.
翻译:平台试验为在一次试验中研究多种干预措施提供了一个框架,有机会打开和关闭武器。在平台试验中使用共同控制可以提高效率,而个人控制武器或每次治疗分别审判。然而,由于共同控制的结果而需要进行多重调整,目前研究人员、制药公司以及监管者之间争论不休。我们调查了平台试验中共同控制武器对一类错误和权力的影响,与模拟研究中以个人控制武器进行的平台试验相比,这种差异和权力的影响。此外,我们评估了在平台试验中需要进行多重调整时对权力的影响。在两种研究设计中,家庭错差率(FWER)比标准、没有实行多重调整时的双重随机控制试验都高。在共同控制的情况下,FWER通货膨胀较小。在大多数情况下,在多重调整后的抽样规模和权力方面,共同控制平台试验仍然有利,而在某些情况下,具有共同控制的平台试验失去了效率收益。因此,我们进一步讨论需要调整家庭定义或家庭假设的可靠性。