I Khan1, S-J Sarker, A Hackshaw. 1. Cancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, 90 Tottenham Court Road (fifth floor), London, UK. I.Khan@ucl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sample sizes for single-stage phase II clinical trials in the literature are often based on exact (binomial) tests with levels of significance (alpha (α) <5% and power >80%). This is because there is not always a sample size where α and power are exactly equal to 5% and 80%, respectively. Consequently, the opportunity to trade-off small amounts of α and power for savings in sample sizes may be lost. METHODS: Sample-size tables are presented for single-stage phase II trials based on exact tests with actual levels of significance and power. Trade-off in small amounts of α and power allows the researcher to select from several possible designs with potentially smaller sample sizes compared with existing approaches. We provide SAS macro coding and an R function, which for a given treatment difference, allow researchers to examine all possible sample sizes for specified differences are provided. RESULTS: In a single-arm study with P(0) (standard treatment)=10% and P(1) (new treatment)=20%, and specified α=5% and power=80%, the A'Hern approach yields n=78 (exact α=4.53%, power=80.81%). However, by relaxing α to 5.67% and power to 77.7%, a sample size of 65 can be used (a saving of 13 patients). INTERPRETATION: The approach we describe is especially useful for trials in rare disorders, or for proof-of-concept studies, where it is important to minimise the trial duration and financial costs, particularly in single-arm cancer trials commonly associated with expensive treatment options.
BACKGROUND: Sample sizes for single-stage phase II clinical trials in the literature are often based on exact (binomial) tests with levels of significance (alpha (α) <5% and power >80%). This is because there is not always a sample size where α and power are exactly equal to 5% and 80%, respectively. Consequently, the opportunity to trade-off small amounts of α and power for savings in sample sizes may be lost. METHODS: Sample-size tables are presented for single-stage phase II trials based on exact tests with actual levels of significance and power. Trade-off in small amounts of α and power allows the researcher to select from several possible designs with potentially smaller sample sizes compared with existing approaches. We provide SAS macro coding and an R function, which for a given treatment difference, allow researchers to examine all possible sample sizes for specified differences are provided. RESULTS: In a single-arm study with P(0) (standard treatment)=10% and P(1) (new treatment)=20%, and specified α=5% and power=80%, the A'Hern approach yields n=78 (exact α=4.53%, power=80.81%). However, by relaxing α to 5.67% and power to 77.7%, a sample size of 65 can be used (a saving of 13 patients). INTERPRETATION: The approach we describe is especially useful for trials in rare disorders, or for proof-of-concept studies, where it is important to minimise the trial duration and financial costs, particularly in single-arm cancer trials commonly associated with expensive treatment options.
Authors: Lawrence V Rubinstein; Edward L Korn; Boris Freidlin; Sally Hunsberger; S Percy Ivy; Malcolm A Smith Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-10-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: K Aogi; H Iwata; N Masuda; H Mukai; M Yoshida; Y Rai; K Taguchi; Y Sasaki; S Takashima Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-10-11 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Dung-Tsa Chen; Po-Yu Huang; Hui-Yi Lin; Alberto A Chiappori; Dmitry I Gabrilovich; Eric B Haura; Scott J Antonia; Jhanelle E Gray Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-07-07
Authors: Mauricio Fernandes; Magdalena Schelotto; Philipp Maximilian Doldi; Giovanna Milani; Abul Andrés Ariza Manzano; Doriam Perera Valdivia; Alexandra Marie Winter Matos; Yasmin Hamdy Abdelrahim; Shaza Ahmed Hamad Bek; Benito K Benitez; Vanessa Luiza Romanelli Tavares; Abdulrahim M Basendwah; Luis Henrique Albuquerque Sousa; Naiara Faria Xavier; Tania Zertuche Maldonado; Sarah Toyomi de Oliveira; Melisa Chaker; Michelle Menon Miyake; Elif Uygur Kucukseymen; Kinza Waqar; Ola M J Alkhozondar; Ricardo Bernardo da Silva; Guilhermo Droppelmann; Antonio Vaz de Macedo; Rui Nakamura; Felipe Fregni Journal: F1000Res Date: 2021-01-22
Authors: Asgeir Store Jakola; Katja Werlenius; Munila Mudaisi; Sofia Hylin; Sara Kinhult; Jiri Bartek; Øyvind Salvesen; Sven Magnus Carlsen; Michael Strandéus; Magnus Lindskog; David Löfgren; Bertil Rydenhag; Louise Carstam; Sasha Gulati; Ole Solheim; Jiri Bartek; Tora Solheim Journal: F1000Res Date: 2018-11-15
Authors: Dallin Tavoian; David W Russ; Timothy D Law; Janet E Simon; Paul J Chase; Emily Hill Guseman; Brian C Clark Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2019-10-22