A S Ruppert1, J Yin2, M Davidian3, A A Tsiatis3, J C Byrd4, J A Woyach4, S J Mandrekar2. 1. Division of Hematology, The Ohio State University, Columbus; Alliance Statistics and Data Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus. Electronic address: amy.stark@osumc.edu. 2. Alliance Statistics and Data Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester. 3. Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA. 4. Division of Hematology, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ibrutinib therapy is safe and effective in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Currently, ibrutinib is administered continuously until disease progression. Combination regimens with ibrutinib are being developed to deepen response which could allow for ibrutinib maintenance (IM) discontinuation. Among untreated older patients with CLL, clinical investigators had the following questions: (i) does ibrutinib + venetoclax + obinutuzumab (IVO) with IM have superior progression-free survival (PFS) compared with ibrutinib + obinutuzumab (IO) with IM, and (ii) does the treatment strategy of IVO + IM for patients without minimal residual disease complete response (MRD- CR) or IVO + IM discontinuation for patients with MRD- CR have superior PFS compared with IO + IM. DESIGN: Conventional designs randomize patients to IO with IM or IVO with IM to address the first objective, or randomize patients to each treatment strategy to address the second objective. A sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design and analysis is proposed to address both objectives. RESULTS: A SMART design strategy is appropriate when comparing adaptive interventions, which are defined by an individual's sequence of treatment decisions and guided by intermediate outcomes, such as response to therapy. A review of common applications of SMART design strategies is provided. Specific to the SMART design previously considered for Alliance study A041702, the general structure of the SMART is presented, an approach to sample size and power calculations when comparing adaptive interventions embedded in the SMART with a time-to-event end point is fully described, and analyses plans are outlined. CONCLUSION: SMART design strategies can be used in cancer clinical trials with adaptive interventions to identify optimal treatment strategies. Further, standard software exists to provide sample size, power calculations, and data analysis for a SMART design.
BACKGROUND: Ibrutinib therapy is safe and effective in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Currently, ibrutinib is administered continuously until disease progression. Combination regimens with ibrutinib are being developed to deepen response which could allow for ibrutinib maintenance (IM) discontinuation. Among untreated older patients with CLL, clinical investigators had the following questions: (i) does ibrutinib + venetoclax + obinutuzumab (IVO) with IM have superior progression-free survival (PFS) compared with ibrutinib + obinutuzumab (IO) with IM, and (ii) does the treatment strategy of IVO + IM for patients without minimal residual disease complete response (MRD- CR) or IVO + IM discontinuation for patients with MRD- CR have superior PFS compared with IO + IM. DESIGN: Conventional designs randomize patients to IO with IM or IVO with IM to address the first objective, or randomize patients to each treatment strategy to address the second objective. A sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design and analysis is proposed to address both objectives. RESULTS: A SMART design strategy is appropriate when comparing adaptive interventions, which are defined by an individual's sequence of treatment decisions and guided by intermediate outcomes, such as response to therapy. A review of common applications of SMART design strategies is provided. Specific to the SMART design previously considered for Alliance study A041702, the general structure of the SMART is presented, an approach to sample size and power calculations when comparing adaptive interventions embedded in the SMART with a time-to-event end point is fully described, and analyses plans are outlined. CONCLUSION: SMART design strategies can be used in cancer clinical trials with adaptive interventions to identify optimal treatment strategies. Further, standard software exists to provide sample size, power calculations, and data analysis for a SMART design.
Authors: Inbal Nahum-Shani; Min Qian; Daniel Almirall; William E Pelham; Beth Gnagy; Gregory A Fabiano; James G Waxmonsky; Jihnhee Yu; Susan A Murphy Journal: Psychol Methods Date: 2012-10-01
Authors: Carol Moreno; Richard Greil; Fatih Demirkan; Alessandra Tedeschi; Bertrand Anz; Loree Larratt; Martin Simkovic; Olga Samoilova; Jan Novak; Dina Ben-Yehuda; Vladimir Strugov; Devinder Gill; John G Gribben; Emily Hsu; Chih-Jian Lih; Cathy Zhou; Fong Clow; Danelle F James; Lori Styles; Ian W Flinn Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2018-12-03 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: John F Seymour; Thomas J Kipps; Barbara Eichhorst; Peter Hillmen; James D'Rozario; Sarit Assouline; Carolyn Owen; John Gerecitano; Tadeusz Robak; Javier De la Serna; Ulrich Jaeger; Guillaume Cartron; Marco Montillo; Rod Humerickhouse; Elizabeth A Punnoose; Yan Li; Michelle Boyer; Kathryn Humphrey; Mehrdad Mobasher; Arnon P Kater Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Katherine K Matthay; C Patrick Reynolds; Robert C Seeger; Hiroyuki Shimada; E Stanton Adkins; Daphne Haas-Kogan; Robert B Gerbing; Wendy B London; Judith G Villablanca Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-01-26 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael Hallek; Bruce D Cheson; Daniel Catovsky; Federico Caligaris-Cappio; Guillaume Dighiero; Hartmut Döhner; Peter Hillmen; Michael J Keating; Emili Montserrat; Kanti R Rai; Thomas J Kipps Journal: Blood Date: 2008-01-23 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Jan A Burger; Alessandra Tedeschi; Paul M Barr; Tadeusz Robak; Carolyn Owen; Paolo Ghia; Osnat Bairey; Peter Hillmen; Nancy L Bartlett; Jianyong Li; David Simpson; Sebastian Grosicki; Stephen Devereux; Helen McCarthy; Steven Coutre; Hang Quach; Gianluca Gaidano; Zvenyslava Maslyak; Don A Stevens; Ann Janssens; Fritz Offner; Jiří Mayer; Michael O'Dwyer; Andrzej Hellmann; Anna Schuh; Tanya Siddiqi; Aaron Polliack; Constantine S Tam; Deepali Suri; Mei Cheng; Fong Clow; Lori Styles; Danelle F James; Thomas J Kipps Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-12-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: John C Byrd; Richard R Furman; Steven E Coutre; Ian W Flinn; Jan A Burger; Kristie A Blum; Barbara Grant; Jeff P Sharman; Morton Coleman; William G Wierda; Jeffrey A Jones; Weiqiang Zhao; Nyla A Heerema; Amy J Johnson; Juthamas Sukbuntherng; Betty Y Chang; Fong Clow; Eric Hedrick; Joseph J Buggy; Danelle F James; Susan O'Brien Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Susan O'Brien; Richard R Furman; Steven Coutre; Ian W Flinn; Jan A Burger; Kristie Blum; Jeff Sharman; William Wierda; Jeffrey Jones; Weiqiang Zhao; Nyla A Heerema; Amy J Johnson; Ying Luan; Danelle F James; Alvina D Chu; John C Byrd Journal: Blood Date: 2018-02-02 Impact factor: 25.476