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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2022 Sep 30;41(22):4299-4310.
doi: 10.1002/sim.9510. Epub 2022 Jun 25.

Estimands for factorial trials

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Estimands for factorial trials

Brennan C Kahan et al. Stat Med. .

Abstract

Factorial trials offer an efficient method to evaluate multiple interventions in a single trial, however the use of additional treatments can obscure research objectives, leading to inappropriate analytical methods and interpretation of results. We define a set of estimands for factorial trials, and describe a framework for applying these estimands, with the aim of clarifying trial objectives and ensuring appropriate primary and sensitivity analyses are chosen. This framework is intended for use in factorial trials where the intent is to conduct "two-trials-in-one" (ie, to separately evaluate the effects of treatments A and B), and is comprised of four steps: (i) specifying how additional treatment(s) (eg, treatment B) will be handled in the estimand, and how intercurrent events affecting the additional treatment(s) will be handled; (ii) designating the appropriate factorial estimator as the primary analysis strategy; (iii) evaluating the interaction to assess the plausibility of the assumptions underpinning the factorial estimator; and (iv) performing a sensitivity analysis using an appropriate multiarm estimator to evaluate to what extent departures from the underlying assumption of no interaction may affect results. We show that adjustment for other factors is necessary for noncollapsible effect measures (such as odds ratio), and through a trial re-analysis we find that failure to consider the estimand could lead to inappropriate interpretation of results. We conclude that careful use of the estimands framework clarifies research objectives and reduces the risk of misinterpretation of trial results, and should become a standard part of both the protocol and reporting of factorial trials.

Keywords: 2 × 2; ICH-E9 addendum; estimand; factorial trial; randomized controlled trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lubsen J, Pocock SJ. Factorial trials in cardiology: pros and cons. Eur Heart J. 1994;15:585‐588. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a060552 - DOI - PubMed
    1. McAlister FA, Straus SE, Sackett DL, et al. Analysis and reporting of factorial trials: a systematic review. Jama. 2003;289:2545‐2553. doi:10.1001/jama.289.19.2545 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Montgomery AA, Astin MP, Peters TJ. Reporting of factorial trials of complex interventions in community settings: a systematic review. Trials. 2011;12(179). doi:10.1186/1745-6215-12-179 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Montgomery AA, Peters TJ, Little P. Design, analysis and presentation of factorial randomised controlled trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3(26). doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-26 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kahan BC, Tsui M, Jairath V, et al. Reporting of randomized factorial trials was frequently inadequate. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;117:52‐59. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.09.018 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources