Literature DB >> 18800338

Approaches to handling data when a phase II trial deviates from the pre-specified Simon's two-stage design.

Yujun Wu1, Weichung J Shih.   

Abstract

Simon's 'optimal' and 'minimax' two-stage designs are common methods for conducting phase IIA studies investigating new cancer therapies. However, these designs are rather rigid in their settings because of the pre-specified rejection rules and fixed sample sizes at each stage. In practice, we often encounter the problem that a study is unable to adhere to the event number and sample sizes of the original two-stage design. In this paper, we consider some approaches in handling situations where deviations or interruptions from the original Simon's two-stage design occur because recruitment of patients is slower than expected. We consider four scenarios and use conditional probabilities to address the issues commonly inquired by the scientific review board. We also discuss how to report p-values in these situations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18800338      PMCID: PMC2678911          DOI: 10.1002/sim.3426

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  11 in total

1.  A three-outcome design for phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  D J Sargent; V Chan; R M Goldberg
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2001-04

2.  Group sequential, sample size re-estimation and two-stage adaptive designs in clinical trials: a comparison.

Authors:  Weichung Joe Shih
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Stochastically curtailed phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  A O Ayanlowo; D T Redden
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  P-value calculation for multistage phase II cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Sin-Ho Jung; Kouros Owzar; Stephen L George; Taiyeong Lee
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.051

Review 5.  Data monitoring committees and problems of lower-than-expected accrual or events rates.

Authors:  E L Korn; R Simon
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1996-12

6.  Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  R Simon
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1989-03

7.  Exact confidence intervals following a group sequential test.

Authors:  A A Tsiatis; G L Rosner; C R Mehta
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  T R Fleming
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Admissible two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Sin-Ho Jung; Taiyeong Lee; KyungMann Kim; Stephen L George
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Adaptive two-stage designs for single-arm phase IIA cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Yong Lin; Weichung J Shih
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.571

View more
  4 in total

1.  Optimal inference for Simon's two-stage design with over or under enrollment at the second stage.

Authors:  Guogen Shan; John J Chen
Journal:  Commun Stat Simul Comput       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 1.118

2.  A two-stage phase II clinical trial design with nested criteria for early stopping and efficacy.

Authors:  Michelle DeVeaux; Michael Kane; Wei Wei; Daniel Zelterman
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 1.894

3.  A Rescue Strategy for Handling Unevaluable Patients in Simon's Two Stage Design.

Authors:  Lisa Belin; Philippe Broët; Yann De Rycke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Two-Stage Single-Arm Trials Are Rarely Analyzed Effectively or Reported Adequately.

Authors:  Michael J Grayling; Adrian P Mander
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2021-12-16
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.