Abstract 4125939: Bayesian re-analysis of the STeroids to REduce Systemic inflammation after infant heart Surgery (STRESS) trial

Background: Prophylactic steroids are often used to reduce the systemic inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass in infants undergoing heart surgery. The STRESS trial found that the likelihood of a worse outcome did not differ between infants randomized to methylprednisolone vs placebo in a risk-adjusted primary analysis (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.05; P=0.14). However, secondary unadjusted analyses showed possible benefits with methylprednisolone. We re-analyzed the STRESS trial using Bayesian analytics to assess probability of benefit with methylprednisolone. Methods: We used a covariate-adjusted proportional odds model using the original STRESS trial model covariates and primary outcome (a ranked composite of death, transplant, major complications and post-op length of stay). We assessed effect thresholds from OR 0.6 to 1.25 (OR <1 conveys benefit, OR >1 conveys harm). We assumed a neutral probability of benefit vs harm with weak prior belief (SD of the normal prior distribution = 0.425). In sensitivity analyses, we evaluated pessimistic (5%-30% prior likelihood of benefit), neutral and optimistic (70%-95% prior likelihood of benefit) prior beliefs, and controlled strength of prior belief as weak (SD = 0.425), moderate (SD = 0.215) and strong (SD = 0.135). We compared posterior distribution of the OR under these priors with the reference results under the vague prior distribution. Analyses consisted of 10 Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulations each consisting of 2000 iterations with a 1000 iteration burn-in to ensure proper posterior convergence. Results: In primary analysis, the posterior probability of benefit from methylprednisolone was 92% and the probability of harm was 8%. The mean absolute benefit was 12%. In sensitivity analyses, the probability of benefit was ≥ 79% for all informative priors except the most pessimistic (Table/Figure). Conclusion: In Bayesian re-analysis of the STRESS trial, probability of benefit with prophylactic methylprednisolone is high and harm is unlikely. Assessing probability of benefit or harm may be more informative than frequentist analytics relying on a p-value threshold. Another advantage is the ability to consider a range of prior evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2024-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4125939
Primary Topic
Fatty Acid Research and Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4125939: Bayesian re-analysis of the STeroids to REduce Systemic inflammation after infant heart Surgery (STRESS) trial

Prince J. Kannankeril, Ryan J. Butts, Brian Blasiole, Adil Husain et al.
Circulation
Fatty Acid Research and Health
article

Abstract 4125939: Bayesian re-analysis of the STeroids to REduce Systemic inflammation after infant heart Surgery (STRESS) trial

Prince J. Kannankeril, Ryan J. Butts, Brian Blasiole, Adil Husain, Tara Karamlou, Pirooz Eghtesady, Kevin Hill, H. Scott Baldwin, David M. Overman, Alexis Benscoter, Michael F. Swartz, Jennifer Li, Eric Wald, Hwanhee Hong, John S. Kim, Andrew Van Bergen, J. Koerner, Brett R. Anderson, Christoph P. Hornik, John P. Scott, Sean M. O’Brien, Marshall Lewis Jacobs, Jeffrey P. Jacobs, Eric M. Graham, David Vener M D
article en

Abstract

Background: Prophylactic steroids are often used to reduce the systemic inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass in infants undergoing heart surgery. The STRESS trial found that the likelihood of a worse outcome did not differ between infants randomized to methylprednisolone vs placebo in a risk-adjusted primary analysis (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.05; P=0.14). However, secondary unadjusted analyses showed possible benefits with methylprednisolone. We re-analyzed the STRESS trial using Bayesian analytics to assess probability of benefit with methylprednisolone. Methods: We used a covariate-adjusted proportional odds model using the original STRESS trial model covariates and primary outcome (a ranked composite of death, transplant, major complications and post-op length of stay). We assessed effect thresholds from OR 0.6 to 1.25 (OR <1 conveys benefit, OR >1 conveys harm). We assumed a neutral probability of benefit vs harm with weak prior belief (SD of the normal prior distribution = 0.425). In sensitivity analyses, we evaluated pessimistic (5%-30% prior likelihood of benefit), neutral and optimistic (70%-95% prior likelihood of benefit) prior beliefs, and controlled strength of prior belief as weak (SD = 0.425), moderate (SD = 0.215) and strong (SD = 0.135). We compared posterior distribution of the OR under these priors with the reference results under the vague prior distribution. Analyses consisted of 10 Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulations each consisting of 2000 iterations with a 1000 iteration burn-in to ensure proper posterior convergence. Results: In primary analysis, the posterior probability of benefit from methylprednisolone was 92% and the probability of harm was 8%. The mean absolute benefit was 12%. In sensitivity analyses, the probability of benefit was ≥ 79% for all informative priors except the most pessimistic (Table/Figure). Conclusion: In Bayesian re-analysis of the STRESS trial, probability of benefit with prophylactic methylprednisolone is high and harm is unlikely. Assessing probability of benefit or harm may be more informative than frequentist analytics relying on a p-value threshold. Another advantage is the ability to consider a range of prior evidence.

CirculationVol. 150(Suppl_1)
Northwestern University (US), Children's Hospital of Wisconsin (US), Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US), Children's Medical Center (US), Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital (US), Cleveland Clinic (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), Medical University of South Carolina (US), Washington University in St. Louis (US), University of Utah (US), University of Florida (US), Clinical Research Institute (US), Children's Hospital Colorado (US), Duke Medical Center (US), University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (US), Advocate Children's Hospital (US), Medical City Children's Hospital (US), Texas Children's Hospital (US), Children's Hospital & Medical Center (US), Vanderbilt Health (US), University of Rochester (US), University of South Florida St. Petersburg (US), University of Colorado Denver (US), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Fatty Acid Research and Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.