Literature DB >> 25809815

Two-stage designs for cross-over bioequivalence trials.

Meinhard Kieser1, Geraldine Rauch1.   

Abstract

The topic of applying two-stage designs in the field of bioequivalence studies has recently gained attention in the literature and in regulatory guidelines. While there exists some methodological research on the application of group sequential designs in bioequivalence studies, implementation of adaptive approaches has focused up to now on superiority and non-inferiority trials. Especially, no comparison of the features and performance characteristics of these designs has been performed, and therefore, the question of which design to employ in this setting remains open. In this paper, we discuss and compare 'classical' group sequential designs and three types of adaptive designs that offer the option of mid-course sample size recalculation. A comprehensive simulation study demonstrates that group sequential designs can be identified, which show power characteristics that are similar to those of the adaptive designs but require a lower average sample size. The methods are illustrated with a real bioequivalence study example.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords:  adaptive design; bioequivalence; cross-over design; sample size recalculation; two-stage design

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25809815     DOI: 10.1002/sim.6487

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


  6 in total

1.  A comparison of group sequential and fixed sample size designs for bioequivalence trials with highly variable drugs.

Authors:  Sophie I E Knahl; Benjamin Lang; Frank Fleischer; Meinhard Kieser
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Two-Stage Adaptive Designs for Three-Treatment Bioequivalence Studies.

Authors:  Michael J Grayling; Adrian P Mander; James M S Wason
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2019-09-06       Impact factor: 1.452

3.  Design and inference for 3-stage bioequivalence testing with serial sampling data.

Authors:  Fangrong Yan; Huihong Zhu; Junlin Liu; Liyun Jiang; Xuelin Huang
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 1.894

4.  Choice of futility boundaries for group sequential designs with two endpoints.

Authors:  Svenja Schüler; Meinhard Kieser; Geraldine Rauch
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  10th Anniversary of a Two-Stage Design in Bioequivalence. Why Has it Still Not Been Implemented?

Authors:  Michał Kaza; Alexander Sokolovskyi; Piotr J Rudzki
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  Blinded and unblinded sample size reestimation in crossover trials balanced for period.

Authors:  Michael J Grayling; Adrian P Mander; James M S Wason
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 2.207

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.