Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026
Optimized Management of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Published on: January 18, 2018
The effect of covariate adjustment for baseline severity in acute stroke clinical trials with responder analysis
Kyra M Garofolo, Sharon D Yeatts, Viswanathan Ramakrishnan
1Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Cannon Street, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. durkalsv@musc.edu.
Background:
Traditionally in acute stroke clinical trials, the primary clinical outcome employed is a dichotomized modified Rankin Scale (mRS). New statistical methods, such as responder analysis, are being used in stroke studies to address the concern that baseline prognostic variables, such as stroke severity, impact the likelihood of a successful outcome. Responder analysis allows the definition of success to vary according to baseline prognostic variables, producing a more clinically relevant insight into the actual effect of investigational treatments. It is unclear whether or not statistical analyses should adjust for prognostic variables when responder analysis is used, as the outcome already takes these prognostic variables into account. This research aims to investigate the effect of covariate adjustment in the responder analysis framework in order to determine the appropriate analytic method.
Methods:
Using a current stroke clinical trial and its pilot studies to guide simulation parameters, 1,000 clinical trials were simulated at varying sample sizes under several treatment effects to assess power and type I error. Covariate-adjusted and unadjusted logistic regressions were used to estimate the treatment effect under each scenario. In the case of covariate-adjusted logistic regression, the trichotomized National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was used in adjustment.
Results:
Under various treatment effect settings, the operating characteristics of the unadjusted and adjusted analyses do not substantially differ. Power and type I error are preserved for both the unadjusted and adjusted analyses.
Conclusions:
Our results suggest that, under the given treatment effect scenarios, the decision whether or not to adjust for baseline severity when using a responder analysis outcome should be guided by the needs of the study, as type I error rates and power do not appear to vary largely between the methods. These findings are applicable to stroke trials which use the mRS for the primary outcome, but also provide a broader insight into the analysis of binary outcomes that are defined based on baseline prognostic variables.
Trial Registration:
This research is part of the Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) trial, Identification Number NCT01369069.
Related Concept Videos
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:22Cardiac Output II: Effect of Stroke Volume on Cardiac Output
Preload
Preload refers to the initial elongation of the cardiac myocytes before contraction and is related to the volume of blood filling the heart at the end of diastole, or end-diastolic volume. The...
01:25Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
01:30Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
01:11Clinical Trials: Overview
01:27Regulation of Stroke Volume
Preload refers to the degree of stretch on the heart before it contracts. It's analogous to the stretching of a rubber band; the more it's stretched, the more forcefully it snaps back. This concept is encapsulated in the Frank-Starling law of the...