Clinical trial design and analysis for comparing three treatments with intra-individual right- and left-hand data. (June 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Machida, Ryunosuke; Sakamaki, Kentaro; Kuchiba, Aya
• Is Part Of: Clinical trials. Volume 20:Number 3(2023)
• Page Start: 203
• Page End: 210
• Publication Date: 2023-06
• Subjects: Self-controlled design -- correlated data -- three treatments -- supportive care; 615.5072405
• DOI: 10.1177/17407745221150281
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1740-7745

Abstract

Background: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy can occur in the right and left hand. Studies on prevention treatments for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy have largely adopted either self-controlled designs or parallel designs to compare two preventive treatments. When three treatment options (two experimental treatments and a control treatment) are available, both designs can be extended. However, no clinical trials have adopted a self-controlled design to compare three prevention treatments for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. The incomplete block crossover design for more than two treatments can be extended to compare three treatments in the self-controlled design. In simple extension, some of the participants receive two experimental treatments in both hands; however, it may be difficult to administer different experimental treatments in both hands for practical reasons, such as a concern for the different types of unexpected adverse events. This study proposes a design and analysis method appropriate for the situation where only one experimental treatment is provided to each participant. Methods: We assume clinical trials to compare each of the two experimental treatments ( E 1 and E 2 ) with the control treatment ( C ) and between two experimental treatments only when both experimental treatments are superior to the control treatment. We propose a self-controlled design, which equally randomizes to four arms to adjust for the dominant hand effect: Arm 1: E 1 for right hand, C for left hand; Arm 2: C for right hand, E 1 for left hand; Arm 3: E 2 for right hand, C for left hand; and Arm 4: C for right hand, E 2 for left hand. We compare operating characteristics of the proposed design with the three-arm parallel design in which the same treatment is performed in both hands by participants. We also assess three proposed analysis methods for comparisons between experimental treatments in the self-controlled design under several conditions of correlations between right and left hands using simulation studies. Results: The simulation studies showed that the proposed design was more powerful than the three-arm parallel design when correlation was 0.3 or higher. For comparisons between experimental treatments, the methods based on the regression model, including the outcome of hands with C as a covariate, had the highest power under modest to high correlation among the analysis methods in the self-controlled design. Conclusion: The proposed design can improve the power for comparing between two experimental treatments and the control treatment. Our design is useful in situations where it is undesirable for participants to receive different experimental treatments in both hands for practical reasons.