Literature DB >> 14969454

Flexible implementations of group sequential stopping rules using constrained boundaries.

Bart E Burington1, Scott S Emerson.   

Abstract

Group sequential stopping rules are often used during the conduct of clinical trials in order to attain more ethical treatment of patients and to better address efficiency concerns. Because the use of such stopping rules materially affects the frequentist operating characteristics of the hypothesis test, it is necessary to choose an appropriate stopping rule during the planning of the study. It is often the case, however, that the number and timing of interim analyses are not precisely known at the time of trial design, and thus the implementation of a particular stopping rule must allow for flexible determination of the schedule of interim analyses. In this article, we consider the use of constrained stopping boundaries in the implementation of stopping rules. We compare this approach when used on various scales for the test statistic. When implemented on the scale of boundary crossing probabilities, this approach is identical to the error spending function approach of Lan and DeMets (1983).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14969454     DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2003.00090.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  8 in total

1.  A two-stage strategy to accommodate general patterns of confounding in the design of observational studies.

Authors:  Sebastien Haneuse; Jonathan Schildcrout; Daniel Gillen
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2011-11-30       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  Exploring the benefits of adaptive sequential designs in time-to-event endpoint settings.

Authors:  Sarah C Emerson; Kyle D Rudser; Scott S Emerson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-12-29       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Phase 3 study of docosahexaenoic acid-paclitaxel versus dacarbazine in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma.

Authors:  A Y Bedikian; R C DeConti; R Conry; S Agarwala; N Papadopoulos; K B Kim; M Ernstoff
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2010-09-20       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  Difluoromethylornithine plus sulindac for the prevention of sporadic colorectal adenomas: a randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

Authors:  Frank L Meyskens; Christine E McLaren; Daniel Pelot; Sharon Fujikawa-Brooks; Philip M Carpenter; Ernest Hawk; Gary Kelloff; Michael J Lawson; Jayashri Kidao; John McCracken; C Gregory Albers; Dennis J Ahnen; D Kim Turgeon; Steven Goldschmid; Peter Lance; Curt H Hagedorn; Daniel L Gillen; Eugene W Gerner
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2008-06

5.  Flexibly Monitoring Group Sequential Survival Trials When Testing is Based Upon a Weighted Log-Rank Statistic.

Authors:  Sean S Brummel; Daniel L Gillen
Journal:  Seq Anal       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 0.927

6.  More data, less information? Potential for nonmonotonic information growth using GEE.

Authors:  Abigail B Shoben; Kyle D Rudser; Scott S Emerson
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2016-04-06       Impact factor: 1.051

7.  A formal test of the hypothesis that idiopathic calcium oxalate stones grow on Randall's plaque.

Authors:  Nicole L Miller; Daniel L Gillen; James C Williams; Andrew P Evan; Sharon B Bledsoe; Fredric L Coe; Elaine M Worcester; Brian R Matlaga; Larry C Munch; James E Lingeman
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2008-11-19       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  On the Use of Local Assessments for Monitoring Centrally Reviewed Endpoints with Missing Data in Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Sean S Brummel; Daniel L Gillen
Journal:  Open J Stat       Date:  2013-08
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.