Abstract
Background and Purpose— Stroke treatments are generally not curative, but rather alter patient outcome over the entire range of functional measures. Dichotomizing outcome scales reduces computational complexity, but discards substantial outcome information, artificially privileges only a single health state transition as clinically meaningful, and often reduces study power. Newer approaches to endpoint analysis have several advantageous properties. Summary of Review— The global statistic assesses treatment effects on multiple outcome measures simultaneously. However, translating the global statistic multidimensional vector effect at the population level into benefit or harm expected in the individual patient is problematic. Responder analysis adjusts outcome thresholds to patient stroke severity at study entry, identifying achievable goals for each patient. However, responder analysis still discards substantial outcome information. Shift analysis gauges change in outcome distributions over the full range of ascertained outcomes, incorporating benefit and harm at all health state transitions valued by patients and clinicians, and often increasing study power. Translation of findings of shift analyses into clinically accessible terms may be accomplished using the recently developed joint outcome table specification technique, which yields the following values for the number needed to treat for 1 patient to improve in a clinically important manner: nimodipine in subarachnoid hemorrhage, 6.8; coiling over clipping, 5.9; intra-arterial pro-urokinase in acute cerebral ischemia, 4.8; intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, 3.3. Conclusions— Dichotomized, global statistic, responder, and shift analyses each offer distinctive benefits and drawbacks. Choice of primary end point analytic technique should be tailored to the study population, expected treatment response, and study purpose. Shift analysis generally provides the most comprehensive index of a treatment’s clinical impact.
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Number Needed to Treat to Benefit and to Harm for Intravenous Tissue Plasminogen Activator Therapy in the 3- to 4.5-Hour Window
Background and Purpose— Measures of a therapy’s effect size are important guides to clinicians, patients, and policy-makers on treatment decisions in clinical practice. The ECAS...
Use of a Global Test for Multiple Outcomes in Stroke Trials With Application to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke t-PA Stroke Trial
Background The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) held a workshop on statistical approaches to analysis of acute stroke trials that have multiple pr...
Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Clinical Features of Intracerebral Hemorrhage: An Update
Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is the second most common subtype of stroke and a critical disease usually leading to severe disability or death. ICH is more common in Asians, ad...
A collaborative sequential meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials of endovascular therapy and tPA vs. tPA alone for acute ischemic stroke: <u>T</u>h<u>R</u>omb<u>E</u>ctomy <u>A</u>nd <u>t</u>PA (TREAT) analysis: statistical analysis plan for a sequential meta-analysis performed within the VISTA-Endovascular collaboration
Rationale Endovascular treatment has been shown to restore blood flow effectively. Second-generation medical devices such as stent retrievers are now showing overwhelming effica...
Trial Design and Reporting Standards for Intra-Arterial Cerebral Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Background and Purpose— The National Institutes of Health (NIH) estimates that stroke costs now exceed $45 billion per year. Stroke is the third leading cause of death and one o...
Publication Info
- Year
- 2007
- Type
- review
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3055-3062
- Citations
- 171
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1161/strokeaha.107.488536