Statistical methods to control for confounders in rare disease settings that use external control

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the drug development for rare disease, the number of treated subjects in the clinical trial is often very small, whereas the number of external controls can be relatively large. There is no clear guidance on choosing an appropriate statistical method to control baseline confounding in this situation. To fill this gap, we conduct extensive simulations to evaluate the performance of commonly used matching and weighting methods as well as the more recently developed targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) and cardinality matching in small sample settings, mimicking the motivating data from a pediatric rare disease. Among the methods examined, the performance of coarsened exact matching (CEM) and TMLE are relatively robust under various model specifications. CEM is only feasible when the number of controls far exceeds the number of treated, whereas TMLE has better performance with less extreme treatment allocation ratios. Our simulations suggest bootstrap is useful for variance estimation in small samples after matching.