Search

Objectives: Respiratory management for pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS) remains largely supportive without data to support one approach over another, including supine versus prone positioning (PP) and conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) versus high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV)., Design: We present the research methodology of a global, multicenter, two-by-two factorial, response-adaptive, randomized controlled trial of supine versus PP and CMV versus HFOV in high moderate-severe PARDS, the Prone and Oscillation Pediatric Clinical Trial ( PROSpect , www.ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03896763)., Setting: Approximately 60 PICUs with on-site extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Oceania with experience using PP and HFOV in the care of patients with PARDS., Patients: Eligible pediatric patients (2 wk old or older and younger than 21 yr) are randomized within 48 h of meeting eligibility criteria occurring within 96 h of endotracheal intubation., Interventions: One of four arms, including supine/CMV, prone/CMV, supine/HFOV, or prone/HFOV. We hypothesize that children with high moderate-severe PARDS treated with PP or HFOV will demonstrate greater than or equal to 2 additional ventilator-free days (VFD)., Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome is VFD through day 28; nonsurvivors receive zero VFD. Secondary and exploratory outcomes include nonpulmonary organ failure-free days, interaction effects of PP with HFOV on VFD, 90-day in-hospital mortality, and among survivors, duration of mechanical ventilation, PICU and hospital length of stay, and post-PICU functional status and health-related quality of life. Up to 600 patients will be randomized, stratified by age group and direct/indirect lung injury. Adaptive randomization will first occur 28 days after 300 patients are randomized and every 100 patients thereafter. At these randomization updates, new allocation probabilities will be computed based on intention-to-treat trial results, increasing allocation to well-performing arms and decreasing allocation to poorly performing arms. Data will be analyzed per intention-to-treat for the primary analyses and per-protocol for primary, secondary, and exploratory analyses., Conclusions: PROSpect will provide clinicians with data to inform the practice of PP and HFOV in PARDS., (Copyright © 2024 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies.)

National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), measured a few hours to days after stroke onset, is an attractive outcome measure for stroke research. NIHSS at the time of presentation (baseline NIHSS) strongly predicts the follow-up NIHSS. Because of the need to account for the baseline NIHSS in the analysis of follow-up NIHSS as an outcome measure, a common and intuitive approach is to define study outcome as the change in NIHSS from baseline to follow-up (ΔNIHSS). However, this approach has important limitations. Analyzing ΔNIHSS implies a very strong assumption about the relationship between baseline and follow-up NIHSS that is unlikely to be satisfied, drawing into question the validity of the resulting statistical analysis. This reduces the precision of the estimates of treatment effects and the power of clinical trials that use this approach to analysis. ANCOVA allows for the analysis of follow-up NIHSS as the dependent variable while adjusting for baseline NIHSS as a covariate in the model and addresses several challenges of using ΔNIHSS outcome using simple bivariate comparisons (eg, a t test, Wilcoxon rank-sum, linear regression without adjustment for baseline) for stroke research. In this article, we use clinical trial simulations to illustrate that variability in NIHSS outcome is less when follow-up NIHSS is adjusted for baseline compared to ΔNIHSS and how a reduction in this variability improves the power. We outline additional, important clinical and statistical arguments to support the superiority of ANCOVA using the final measurement of the NIHSS adjusted for baseline over, and caution against using, the simple bivariate comparison of absolute NIHSS change (ie, delta).

Objectives: Sepsis is the tenth leading cause of death in the United States. Despite extensive research, mortality rates for sepsis have not substantially improved in the last several decades. We describe an innovative phase II clinical trial design for evaluating the addition of L-carnitine to the treatment of vasopressor-dependent septic shock., Design: The design incorporates a variety of features to increase efficiency, including a normal dynamic linear dose-response model, adaptive randomization, and early stopping for futility or success based on the probability that a future phase III trial using a 28-day mortality outcome would be successful., Setting: Trial design and computer simulation of a trial to be conducted in the emergency department and ICU., Interventions: Proposed to study intravenous L-carnitine., Measurements: The proposed trial uses an early endpoint, the 48-hour change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, to drive adaptive randomization and dose selection., Main Results: We use existing data to model the expected relationship between the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment change and the 28-day mortality to determine the trial's operating characteristics using Monte Carlo simulation., Conclusions: The resulting trial efficiently identifies the best dose of L-carnitine and provides clear guidance regarding whether to continue development into phase III.