Literature DB >> 28815655

A clinical trial design using the concept of proportional time using the generalized gamma ratio distribution.

Milind A Phadnis1, James B Wetmore2,3, Matthew S Mayo1.   

Abstract

Traditional methods of sample size and power calculations in clinical trials with a time-to-event end point are based on the logrank test (and its variations), Cox proportional hazards (PH) assumption, or comparison of means of 2 exponential distributions. Of these, sample size calculation based on PH assumption is likely the most common and allows adjusting for the effect of one or more covariates. However, when designing a trial, there are situations when the assumption of PH may not be appropriate. Additionally, when it is known that there is a rapid decline in the survival curve for a control group, such as from previously conducted observational studies, a design based on the PH assumption may confer only a minor statistical improvement for the treatment group that is neither clinically nor practically meaningful. For such scenarios, a clinical trial design that focuses on improvement in patient longevity is proposed, based on the concept of proportional time using the generalized gamma ratio distribution. Simulations are conducted to evaluate the performance of the proportional time method and to identify the situations in which such a design will be beneficial as compared to the standard design using a PH assumption, piecewise exponential hazards assumption, and specific cases of a cure rate model. A practical example in which hemorrhagic stroke patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms in a putative clinical trial demonstrates the usefulness of this approach by drastically reducing the number of patients needed for study enrollment.
Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  generalized gamma; nonproportional hazards; piecewise exponential; proportional time; relative time; sample size

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28815655      PMCID: PMC6478034          DOI: 10.1002/sim.7421

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


  17 in total

1.  Sample-size calculations for the Cox proportional hazards regression model with nonbinary covariates.

Authors:  F Y Hsieh; P W Lavori
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2000-12

2.  Designing complex group sequential survival trials.

Authors:  Edward Lakatos
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-07-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  The accelerated failure time model: a useful alternative to the Cox regression model in survival analysis.

Authors:  L J Wei
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1992 Oct-Nov       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Stroke and the "stroke belt" in dialysis: contribution of patient characteristics to ischemic stroke rate and its geographic variation.

Authors:  James B Wetmore; Edward F Ellerbeck; Jonathan D Mahnken; Milind A Phadnis; Sally K Rigler; John A Spertus; Xinhua Zhou; Purna Mukhopadhyay; Theresa I Shireman
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 10.121

5.  Parametric survival analysis and taxonomy of hazard functions for the generalized gamma distribution.

Authors:  Christopher Cox; Haitao Chu; Michael F Schneider; Alvaro Muñoz
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Race, ethnicity, and state-by-state geographic variation in hemorrhagic stroke in dialysis patients.

Authors:  James B Wetmore; Milind A Phadnis; Jonathan D Mahnken; Edward F Ellerbeck; Sally K Rigler; Xinhua Zhou; Theresa I Shireman
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 8.237

7.  A comparison of the generalized gamma and exponentiated Weibull distributions.

Authors:  Christopher Cox; Matthew Matheson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  An ensemble survival model for estimating relative residual longevity following stroke: Application to mortality data in the chronic dialysis population.

Authors:  Milind A Phadnis; James B Wetmore; Theresa I Shireman; Edward F Ellerbeck; Jonathan D Mahnken
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 3.021

9.  On the restricted mean survival time curve in survival analysis.

Authors:  Lihui Zhao; Brian Claggett; Lu Tian; Hajime Uno; Marc A Pfeffer; Scott D Solomon; Lorenzo Trippa; L J Wei
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Restricted mean survival time: an alternative to the hazard ratio for the design and analysis of randomized trials with a time-to-event outcome.

Authors:  Patrick Royston; Mahesh K B Parmar
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-12-07       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  4 in total

1.  Sample size calculations for noninferiority trials for time-to-event data using the concept of proportional time.

Authors:  Milind A Phadnis; Matthew S Mayo
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 1.416

2.  Sample size calculation for two-arm trials with time-to-event endpoint for nonproportional hazards using the concept of Relative Time when inference is built on comparing Weibull distributions.

Authors:  Milind A Phadnis; Matthew S Mayo
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2021-07-17       Impact factor: 1.715

3.  Are non-constant rates and non-proportional treatment effects accounted for in the design and analysis of randomised controlled trials? A review of current practice.

Authors:  Kim Jachno; Stephane Heritier; Rory Wolfe
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Assessing accuracy of Weibull shape parameter estimate from historical studies for subsequent sample size calculation in clinical trials with time-to-event outcome.

Authors:  Milind A Phadnis; Palash Sharma; Nadeesha Thewarapperuma; Prabhakar Chalise
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2020-02-26
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.