Exploring the use of synthetic placebo populations in ALS randomized clinical trials
Bowles, H.; Opie-Martina, S.; Shojaiea, A.; Libonatib, L.; Iacoangelia, A.; Al Khleifat, A.; Al-Chalabi, A.
Show abstract
ObjectivesThe use of synthetic data to supplement clinical trial placebo groups or for trial planning is rapidly gaining interest. However, there is not yet an established framework for generating synthetic data for these purposes. In this work we test two approaches to generating synthetic placebo arms for ALS trials with survival being the primary outcome variable. MethodsFor the first approach, we extracted sample subsets from the UK MND register (n = 308) using an evolutionary algorithm such that the subset baseline variables matched a target trials group, either people enrolled in LiCALS (n = 106) or people included in the PRO-ACT database (n = 171). We also applied trial specific exclusion criteria where possible or alternatively we applied a custom time filter. For the second approach, survival was predicted for LiCALS participants using the ENCALS model. Survival probabilities from each method were compared to real placebo participants using Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log rank test. ResultsWe found that the synthetic placebo groups derived from the MND register matched the target trials outcomes very well. The ENCALS model produces synthetic placebo groups that are significantly different to the real placebo groups. However, when participants are censored at 6 month intervals, the ENCALS synthetic group matches the target group very well between 24 and 48 months, indicating a possible timeframe that this method could be utilised. ConclusionBoth the register based approach and the ENCALS prognostic model generated synthetic placebo groups that matched placebo groups from historical trials. These methods need to be validated in prospective trials.
Matching journals
The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A low molecular weight dextran sulphate, ILB(R), for the treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS): an open-label, single-arm, single-centre, phase II trial 92%
- Clinical Trials for Wolfram Syndrome Neurodegeneration: Novel Design, Endpoints, and Analysis Models 91%
- Towards development of a statistical framework to evaluate myotonic dystrophy type 1 mRNA biomarkers in the context of a clinical trial 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- AI reveals insights into link between CD33 and cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's Disease 90%
- Ranking of cell clusters in a single-cell RNA-sequencing analysis framework using prior knowledge 89%
- A regularized functional regression model enabling transcriptome-wide dosage-dependent association study of cancer drug response 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- CDS-PD: A Novel Clinical Decision Support Platform for Parkinson's Disease 90%
- Lesion site and therapy time predict responses to a therapy for anomia after stroke: a prognostic model development study 90%
- Machine learning approach to dynamic risk modeling of mortality in COVID-19: a UK Biobank study 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- An Explainable Multi-Modal Neural Network Architecture for Predicting Epilepsy Comorbidities Based on Administrative Claims Data 90%
- Targeted screening for Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials using data-driven disease progression models 88%
- A Bayesian account of generalist and specialist formation under the Active Inference framework 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Reliable Monitoring of Respiratory Function with Home Spirometry in People Living with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis 92%
- A randomized sham-controlled trial of transcranial and intranasal photobiomodulation in Japanese patients with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia due to Alzhimer’s disease: a protocol 88%
- Deep learning using EEG spectrograms for prognosis in idiopathic rapid eye movement behavior disorder (RBD) 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.