Author: Duval, Xavier; van der Werf, Sylvie; Blanchon, Thierry; Mosnier, Anne; Bouscambert-Duchamp, Maude; Tibi, Annick; Enouf, Vincent; Charlois-Ou, Cécile; Vincent, Corine; Andreoletti, Laurent; Tubach, Florence; Lina, Bruno; Mentré, France; Leport, Catherine
Title: Efficacy of Oseltamivir-Zanamivir Combination Compared to Each Monotherapy for Seasonal Influenza: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial Document date: 2010_11_2
ID: 19sejitq_16
Snippet: Sample size evaluation assumed that virological response was obtained in 70% of patients in the oseltamivir-zanamivir arm, compared to 55% in each of monotherapy arms on the basis of the extrapolation of the results of previous trials [2, 4] . Samples of 300 subjects per arm had 90% power to detect this difference, with a two-sided test and a type I error of 0.025 because of the two tests (factoring 20% lack of follow-up). Proportions of response.....
Document: Sample size evaluation assumed that virological response was obtained in 70% of patients in the oseltamivir-zanamivir arm, compared to 55% in each of monotherapy arms on the basis of the extrapolation of the results of previous trials [2, 4] . Samples of 300 subjects per arm had 90% power to detect this difference, with a two-sided test and a type I error of 0.025 because of the two tests (factoring 20% lack of follow-up). Proportions of response at day 2 were compared between the combination therapy arm (OZ) and each monotherapy arm (O or Z) separately using two tests with a type I error of 0.025 because of the two tests. Patients without a day 2 sample were considered treatment failures. Mean decreases of log 10 viral load were compared using a t-test in patients who had both day 0 and day 2 samples assuming a value of 0.5 cgeq/ml when RT-PCR was negative. For clinical endpoints nonparametric tests were used. Times to resolution of illness and symptoms score at the end of treatment were compared using Wilcoxon tests. If time to symptom alleviation was missing it was imputed to be 14 d, i.e., the end of the trial; 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of median differences were estimated by bootstrap. Probability of symptoms alleviation versus day of treatment was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method and was compared between groups with the log-rank test. Proportions of clinical events and of patients with alleviation of symptoms were compared using Fisher's exact tests. As an exploratory analysis, 95% CIs for differences of response between the two monotherapies were also estimated. All analyses were performed using SAS software, version 9.1 (SAS Institute).
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- bootstrap estimate and day:1 0:day: 1
- clinical endpoint and combination therapy: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
- clinical endpoint and confidence interval: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
- clinical endpoint and day:1 0:day: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
- clinical endpoint and exact test: 1
- clinical endpoint and exploratory analysis: 1, 2, 3
- clinical event and confidence interval: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
- clinical event and day patient: 1, 2
- clinical event and day:1 0:day: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
- clinical event and exploratory analysis: 1
- combination therapy and confidence interval: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- combination therapy and day patient: 1, 2, 3, 4
- combination therapy and day:1 0:day: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
- combination therapy and error type: 1
- combination therapy and exact test: 1, 2, 3
- combination therapy and exploratory analysis: 1, 2
- combination therapy arm and confidence interval: 1
- confidence interval and exploratory analysis: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23
- confidence interval and Fisher exact test: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date