Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Aug 24;4(1):68.
doi: 10.1186/s41687-020-00218-5.

What is an estimand & how does it relate to quantifying the effect of treatment on patient-reported quality of life outcomes in clinical trials?

Affiliations

What is an estimand & how does it relate to quantifying the effect of treatment on patient-reported quality of life outcomes in clinical trials?

Rachael Lawrance et al. J Patient Rep Outcomes. .

Abstract

Background: Published in 2019, a new addendum to the ICH E9 guideline presents the estimand framework as a systematic approach to ensure alignment among clinical trial objectives, trial execution/conduct, statistical analyses, and interpretation of results. The use of the estimand framework for describing clinical trial objectives has yet to be extensively considered in the context of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We discuss the application of the estimand framework to PRO objectives when designing clinical trials in the future, with a focus on PRO outcomes in oncology trial settings as our example. MAIN: We describe the components of an estimand and take a naïve PRO trial objective to illustrate how to apply attributes described in the estimand framework to inform construction of a detailed clinical trial objective and its related estimand. We discuss identifying potential post-randomization events that alter the interpretation of the endpoint or render its observation impossible (also defined as intercurrent events) in the context of PRO endpoints, and the implications of how to handle intercurrent events in the construction of the PRO objective. Using a simple objective statement, "What is the effect of treatment X on patient's quality of life?", we build up an example estimand statement and also use a previously published phase III oncology clinical trial to illustrate how an estimand for a PRO objective could have been written to align to the estimate framework.

Conclusion: The use of the estimand framework, as described in the new ICH E9 (R1) addendum guideline will become a key common framework for developing clinical trial objectives for evaluating effects of treatment. In the context of considering PROs, the framework provides an opportunity to more precisely specify and build the rationale for patient-focused objectives. This will help to ensure that clinical trials used for registration are designed and analysed appropriately, enabling all stakeholders to accurately interpret conclusions about the treatment effects for patient-focused outcomes.

Keywords: Clinical trial; Design; Estimand; HRQoL; ICH; Objective; PRO; Patient; Treatment effect.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

RL, PG and KC are employees of Adelphi Values, which provides consultancy services to the Pharmaceutical industry. Other authors are employees of Pharmaceutical companies: ED is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG. PT is an employee of Genentech. HL and DA are employees of Novartis Pharmaceuticals corporation. IG and GW are employees of Boehringer-Ingelheim, Kaspar Rufibach is an employee of F.Hoffmann-La Roche.

The authors declare that they have other no competing interests in this manuscript.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The five attributes of an estimand according to the ICH E9 (R1) addendum
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Definitions for strategies for handling intercurrent events from ICH E9 (R1) addendum [2]
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Illustrative Patient treatment journeys

References

    1. Institute of Medicine . Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st Century. 2001. - PubMed
    1. International Council for Harmonisation . Addendum on estimands and sensitivity analysis in clinical trials to the guideline om statistical principles for clinical trials E9(R) 2019.
    1. Huang, X., Lin, J., & Demner-Fushman, D. (2006). Evaluation of PICO as a knowledge representation for clinical questions. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings, 2006, 359–363. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bottomley A, Pe M, Sloan J, et al. Analysing data from patient-reported outcome and quality of life endpoints for cancer clinical trials: a start in setting international standards. The Lancet Oncology. 2016;17(11):e510–e514. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30510-1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Coens C, Pe M, Dueck AC, et al. International standards for the analysis of quality of life and patient reported outcomes endpoints in cancer randomised controlled trials; recommendations based on critical reviews of the literature and international multi-expert, multi-stakeholder collaborative process. The Lancet Oncology. 2020;21:e83–e96. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30790-9. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources