Literature DB >> 25228636

A multi-stage drop-the-losers design for multi-arm clinical trials.

James Wason1, Nigel Stallard2, Jack Bowden1, Christopher Jennison3.   

Abstract

Multi-arm multi-stage trials can improve the efficiency of the drug development process when multiple new treatments are available for testing. A group-sequential approach can be used in order to design multi-arm multi-stage trials, using an extension to Dunnett's multiple-testing procedure. The actual sample size used in such a trial is a random variable that has high variability. This can cause problems when applying for funding as the cost will also be generally highly variable. This motivates a type of design that provides the efficiency advantages of a group-sequential multi-arm multi-stage design, but has a fixed sample size. One such design is the two-stage drop-the-losers design, in which a number of experimental treatments, and a control treatment, are assessed at a prescheduled interim analysis. The best-performing experimental treatment and the control treatment then continue to a second stage. In this paper, we discuss extending this design to have more than two stages, which is shown to considerably reduce the sample size required. We also compare the resulting sample size requirements to the sample size distribution of analogous group-sequential multi-arm multi-stage designs. The sample size required for a multi-stage drop-the-losers design is usually higher than, but close to, the median sample size of a group-sequential multi-arm multi-stage trial. In many practical scenarios, the disadvantage of a slight loss in average efficiency would be overcome by the huge advantage of a fixed sample size. We assess the impact of delay between recruitment and assessment as well as unknown variance on the drop-the-losers designs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical trial design; delay; group-sequential designs; interim analysis; multi-arm multi-stage designs; multiple testing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 25228636      PMCID: PMC5302074          DOI: 10.1177/0962280214550759

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  15 in total

1.  Drop-the-losers design: normal case.

Authors:  Allan R Sampson; Michael W Sill
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.207

2.  Unbiased estimation of selected treatment means in two-stage trials.

Authors:  Jack Bowden; Ekkehard Glimm
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.207

3.  A group-sequential design for clinical trials with treatment selection.

Authors:  Nigel Stallard; Tim Friede
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-12-20       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  A confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trial design incorporating short-term endpoint information.

Authors:  Nigel Stallard
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  A two-stage design for choosing among several experimental treatments and a control in clinical trials.

Authors:  P F Thall; R Simon; S S Ellenberg
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Group sequential clinical trials with triangular continuation regions.

Authors:  J Whitehead; I Stratton
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials.

Authors:  P C O'Brien; T R Fleming
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Conditionally unbiased estimation in phase II/III clinical trials with early stopping for futility.

Authors:  Peter K Kimani; Susan Todd; Nigel Stallard
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Issues in applying multi-arm multi-stage methodology to a clinical trial in prostate cancer: the MRC STAMPEDE trial.

Authors:  Matthew R Sydes; Mahesh K B Parmar; Nicholas D James; Noel W Clarke; David P Dearnaley; Malcolm D Mason; Rachel C Morgan; Karen Sanders; Patrick Royston
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 10.  Adaptive trial designs: a review of barriers and opportunities.

Authors:  John A Kairalla; Christopher S Coffey; Mitchell A Thomann; Keith E Muller
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-08-23       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  11 in total

1.  The Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design.

Authors:  Munyaradzi Dimairo; Philip Pallmann; James Wason; Susan Todd; Thomas Jaki; Steven A Julious; Adrian P Mander; Christopher J Weir; Franz Koenig; Marc K Walton; Jon P Nicholl; Elizabeth Coates; Katie Biggs; Toshimitsu Hamasaki; Michael A Proschan; John A Scott; Yuki Ando; Daniel Hind; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2020-06-17

2.  To add or not to add a new treatment arm to a multiarm study: A decision-theoretic framework.

Authors:  Kim May Lee; James Wason; Nigel Stallard
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-05-21       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  A web application for the design of multi-arm clinical trials.

Authors:  Michael J Grayling; James Ms Wason
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  The adaptive designs CONSORT extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design.

Authors:  Munyaradzi Dimairo; Philip Pallmann; James Wason; Susan Todd; Thomas Jaki; Steven A Julious; Adrian P Mander; Christopher J Weir; Franz Koenig; Marc K Walton; Jon P Nicholl; Elizabeth Coates; Katie Biggs; Toshimitsu Hamasaki; Michael A Proschan; John A Scott; Yuki Ando; Daniel Hind; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Bayesian adaptive bandit-based designs using the Gittins index for multi-armed trials with normally distributed endpoints.

Authors:  Adam L Smith; Sofía S Villar
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 1.404

6.  Multi-arm multi-stage trials can improve the efficiency of finding effective treatments for stroke: a case study.

Authors:  Thomas Jaki; James M S Wason
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2018-11-27       Impact factor: 2.298

7.  Adding flexibility to clinical trial designs: an example-based guide to the practical use of adaptive designs.

Authors:  Thomas Burnett; Pavel Mozgunov; Philip Pallmann; Sofia S Villar; Graham M Wheeler; Thomas Jaki
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 8.775

8.  Controlling type I error rates in multi-arm clinical trials: A case for the false discovery rate.

Authors:  James M S Wason; David S Robertson
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 1.894

9.  Statistical consideration when adding new arms to ongoing clinical trials: the potentials and the caveats.

Authors:  Kim May Lee; Louise C Brown; Thomas Jaki; Nigel Stallard; James Wason
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Efficient Adaptive Designs for Clinical Trials of Interventions for COVID-19.

Authors:  Nigel Stallard; Lisa Hampson; Norbert Benda; Werner Brannath; Thomas Burnett; Tim Friede; Peter K Kimani; Franz Koenig; Johannes Krisam; Pavel Mozgunov; Martin Posch; James Wason; Gernot Wassmer; John Whitehead; S Faye Williamson; Sarah Zohar; Thomas Jaki
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 1.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.