Literature DB >> 16422307

Monitoring event times in early phase clinical trials: some practical issues.

Peter F Thall1, Leiko H Wooten, Nizar M Tannir.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In many early phase clinical trials it is scientifically inappropriate or logistically infeasible to characterize patient outcome as a binary variable. In such settings, it often is more natural to construct early stopping rules based on time-to-event variables. This type of design may involve a variety of complications, however.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to illustrate by example how one may deal with various complications that may arise when monitoring time-to-event outcomes in an early phase clinical trial.
METHODS: We present a series of Bayesian designs for a phase II clinical trial in kidney cancer. Each design includes a procedure for monitoring the times to a severe adverse event, disease progression and death. The first design, which is the simplest, is based on the time to failure, defined as any of the three events, assuming exponentially distributed failure times with an inverse gamma prior on the mean. This design is compared by simulation to the CMAP design (Cheung and Thall, Biometrics, 2002; 58: 89-97). The model and monitoring procedure are then extended successively to accommodate several common practical complications, and we also study the method's robustness.
RESULTS: Our simulations show that 1) one may apply the monitoring rule periodically, rather than continuously, without a substantive degradation of the design's reliability; 2) it is very important to account for interval censoring due to periodic evaluation of disease status; 3) it is important to account for the effect of disease progression on the subsequent death rate; 4) conducting a randomized trial presents little additional difficulty and provides unbiased comparisons; and 5) the exponential-inverse gamma model is surprisingly robust in most cases. LIMITATIONS: The methods discussed here do not account for patient heterogeneity. This is an important but complex issue that may be dealt with by extending the models and methods given here to accommodate patient covariates and treatment-covariate interaction.
CONCLUSIONS: Bayesian procedures for monitoring time-to-event outcomes offer a practical way to conduct a variety of early phase trials. Considerable care must be given, however, to modeling the important aspects of the trial at hand, and to calibrating the prior and the design parameters to ensure that the design will have good operating characteristics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16422307     DOI: 10.1191/1740774505cn121oa

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  19 in total

Review 1.  Statistical issues in clinical trial design.

Authors:  Kenneth R Hess
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.075

2.  Suspension of accrual in phase II cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Yimei Li; Rosemarie Mick; Daniel F Heitjan
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Adaptive clinical trial designs in oncology.

Authors:  Yong Zang; J Jack Lee
Journal:  Chin Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-12

4.  A phase I/II study of veliparib (ABT-888) with radiation and temozolomide in newly diagnosed diffuse pontine glioma: a Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium study.

Authors:  Patricia A Baxter; Jack M Su; Arzu Onar-Thomas; Catherine A Billups; Xiao-Nan Li; Tina Young Poussaint; Edward R Smith; Patrick Thompson; Adekunle Adesina; Pete Ansell; Vincent Giranda; Arnold Paulino; Lindsey Kilburn; Ibrahim Quaddoumi; Alberto Broniscer; Susan M Blaney; Ira J Dunkel; Maryam Fouladi
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 12.300

5.  Bayesian clinical trials at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center: An update.

Authors:  Rebecca S Slack Tidwell; S Andrew Peng; Minxing Chen; Diane D Liu; Ying Yuan; J Jack Lee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  Cladribine and low-dose cytarabine alternating with decitabine as front-line therapy for elderly patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: a phase 2 single-arm trial.

Authors:  Tapan M Kadia; Jorge Cortes; Farhad Ravandi; Elias Jabbour; Marina Konopleva; Christopher B Benton; Jan Burger; Koji Sasaki; Gautam Borthakur; Courtney D DiNardo; Naveen Pemmaraju; Naval Daver; Alessandra Ferrajoli; Xuemei Wang; Keyur Patel; Jeffrey L Jorgensen; Sa Wang; Susan O'Brien; Sherry Pierce; Carla Tuttle; Zeev Estrov; Srdan Verstovsek; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Hagop Kantarjian
Journal:  Lancet Haematol       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 18.959

7.  Bayesian decision theoretic two-stage design in phase II clinical trials with survival endpoint.

Authors:  Lili Zhao; Jeremy M G Taylor; Scott M Schuetze
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-02-23       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Accounting for patient heterogeneity in phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  J Kyle Wathen; Peter F Thall; John D Cook; Elihu H Estey
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-07-10       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  A phase II trial of gemcitabine plus capecitabine for metastatic renal cell cancer previously treated with immunotherapy and targeted agents.

Authors:  Nizar M Tannir; Peter F Thall; Chaan S Ng; Xuemei Wang; Leiko Wooten; Arlene Siefker-Radtke; Paul Mathew; Lance Pagliaro; Christopher Wood; Eric Jonasch
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-07-17       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  MIDAS: a practical Bayesian design for platform trials with molecularly targeted agents.

Authors:  Ying Yuan; Beibei Guo; Mark Munsell; Karen Lu; Amir Jazaeri
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.