Literature DB >> 22753584

Overestimation of the effect size in group sequential trials.

Jenny J Zhang1, Gideon M Blumenthal, Kun He, Shenghui Tang, Patricia Cortazar, Rajeshwari Sridhara.   

Abstract

Group sequential designs (GSD), which provide for interim monitoring of efficacy data and allow potential early trial termination while preserving the type I error rate, have become commonplace in oncology clinical trials. Although ethically appealing, GSDs tend to overestimate the true treatment effect size at early interim analyses. Overestimation of the treatment effect may exaggerate the benefit of a drug and provide imprecise information for physicians and their patients about a drug's true effect. The cause and effect of such a phenomenon are generally not well understood by many in clinical trial practice. In this article, we provide a graphical explanation for why the phenomenon of overestimation in GSDs occurs. The potential overestimation of the magnitude of the treatment effect is of particular concern in oncology, in which the more subjective endpoint of progression-free survival has increasingly been adopted as the primary endpoint in pivotal phase III trials. ©2012 AACR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22753584     DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-3118

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  5 in total

Review 1.  Independent data monitoring committees: an update and overview.

Authors:  Oliver Sartor; Susan Halabi
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2015-01-24       Impact factor: 3.498

2.  Statistical Power and Swallowing Rehabilitation Research: Current Landscape and Next Steps.

Authors:  James C Borders; Alessandro A Grande; Michelle S Troche
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 3.438

3.  Optimal designs for phase II/III drug development programs including methods for discounting of phase II results.

Authors:  Stella Erdmann; Marietta Kirchner; Heiko Götte; Meinhard Kieser
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-10-09       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Impact of lack-of-benefit stopping rules on treatment effect estimates of two-arm multi-stage (TAMS) trials with time to event outcome.

Authors:  Babak Choodari-Oskooei; Mahesh K B Parmar; Patrick Royston; Jack Bowden
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 5.  An Investigation of the Shortcomings of the CONSORT 2010 Statement for the Reporting of Group Sequential Randomised Controlled Trials: A Methodological Systematic Review.

Authors:  Abigail Stevely; Munyaradzi Dimairo; Susan Todd; Steven A Julious; Jonathan Nicholl; Daniel Hind; Cindy L Cooper
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.