Author:
Haviari Skerdi,Mentré France
Abstract
Background
In some medical indications, numerous interventions have a weak presumption of efficacy, but a good track record or presumption of safety. This makes it feasible to evaluate them simultaneously. This study evaluates a pragmatic fractional factorial trial design that randomly allocates a pre-specified number of interventions to each participant, and statistically tests main intervention effects. We compare it to factorial trials, parallel-arm trials and multiple head-to-head trials, and derive some good practices for its design and analysis.
Methods
We simulated various scenarios involving 4 to 20 candidate interventions among which 2 to 8 could be simultaneously allocated. A binary outcome was assumed. One or two interventions were assumed effective, with various interactions (positive, negative, none). Efficient combinatorics algorithms were created. Sample sizes and power were obtained by simulations in which the statistical test was either difference of proportions or multivariate logistic regression Wald test with or without interaction terms for adjustment, with Bonferroni multiplicity-adjusted alpha risk for both. Native R code is provided without need for compiling or packages.
Results
Distributive trials reduce sample sizes 2- to sevenfold compared to parallel arm trials, and increase them 1- to twofold compared to factorial trials, mostly when fewer allocations than for the factorial design are possible. An unexpectedly effective intervention causes small decreases in power (< 10%) if its effect is additive, but large decreases (possibly down to 0) if not, as for factorial designs. These large decreases are prevented by using interaction terms to adjust the analysis, but these additional estimands have a sample size cost and are better pre-specified. The issue can also be managed by adding a true control arm without any intervention.
Conclusion
Distributive randomization is a viable design for mass parallel evaluation of interventions in constrained trial populations. It should be introduced first in clinical settings where many undercharacterized interventions are potentially available, such as disease prevention strategies, digital behavioral interventions, dietary supplements for chronic conditions, or emerging diseases. Pre-trial simulations are recommended, for which tools are provided.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference46 articles.
1. Office of the Commissioner. Summary of NDA Approvals & Receipts, 1938 to the present. FDA. 2019 Dec 20 [cited 2023 May 15]; Available from: https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/histories-product-regulation/summary-nda-approvals-receipts-1938-present.
2. Batta A, Kalra BS, Khirasaria R. Trends in FDA drug approvals over last 2 decades: An observational study. J Family Med Prim Care. 2020;9(1):105–14.
3. United States: Government Accountability Office. Drug Safety: Most Drugs Withdrawn in Recent Years Had Greater Health Risks for Women. U.S. Government Printing Office; 2001 [cited 2023 May 15]. Available from: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-01-286R/html/GAOREPORTS-GAO-01-286R.htm
4. Huusko J, Kinnunen UM, Saranto K. Medical device regulation (MDR) in health technology enterprises - perspectives of managers and regulatory professionals. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):310.
5. Wierzejska RE. Dietary Supplements-For Whom? The Current State of Knowledge about the Health Effects of Selected Supplement Use. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(17):8897.