| My understanding is that the results are still useful and can be include in the statistical analysis. This is what I heard form the BBC's Newscast podcast https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08ztv8h (starts around 7:30) Professor Jennifer Rogers (clinical trial statistician): > "There was some planned dosing differences anyway but this one happened by accident. Now that doesn't mean these results are completely invalid - doesn't mean that at all. You can make changes to your protocol and you can make changes to what you're gonna analyse all the way up until you actually see your data.... If you haven't seen what the data looks like, you are allowed to make changes to your protocols and it is quite common, it does happen that people make changes as to what they're going to analyse. > "So this change was carried out with discussion with the regulators so it was all fine..." Now I tried to find the same information reported online and I found this from the same Professor: https://spectator.com.au/2020/11/what-we-know-so-far-about-t... > It is perfectly acceptable to make changes to the protocol prior to database lock, so the protocol could have been updated to include this additional analysis (the point of closing a database is to ensure a trial can remain blind, meaning researchers can’t carry out ad-hoc analysis or potentially selectively report results before proper analysis takes place). However, according to version 14 of the protocol, dated 9 November 2020, the primary analysis was set to be the efficacy of two doses of vaccine (across both half and full dose), with secondary analyses being the efficacy of at least one full dose and efficacy of two full doses of vaccine. Efficacy of half dose with a full dose booster was not considered as a secondary analysis in the protocol and so could be an ad-hoc analysis post database lock. So I'm not actually sure whether AstraZeneca announced the change to their analysis before or after they started looking at their results. If they announced they were going to include the half-doses before database lock then they can use them as valid results. |