Literature DB >> 31017843

Time-trend impact on treatment estimation in two-arm clinical trials with a binary outcome and Bayesian response adaptive randomization.

Yunyun Jiang1, Wenle Zhao2, Valerie Durkalski-Mauldin2.   

Abstract

Clinical trial design and analysis often assume study population homogeneity, although patient baseline profile and standard of care may evolve over time, especially in trials with long recruitment periods. The time-trend phenomenon can affect the treatment estimation and the operating characteristics of trials with Bayesian response adaptive randomization (BRAR). The mechanism of time-trend impact on BRAR is increasingly being studied but some aspects remain unclear. The goal of this research is to quantify the bias in treatment effect estimation due to the use of BRAR in the presence of time-trend. In addition, simulations are conducted to compare the performance of three commonly used BRAR algorithms under different time-trend patterns with and without early stopping rules. The results demonstrate that using these BRAR methods in a two-arm trial with time-trend may cause type I error inflation and treatment effect estimation bias. The magnitude and direction of the bias are affected by the parameters of the BRAR algorithm and the time-trend pattern.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian response adaptive randomization; adaptive allocation; bias; clinical trial; time-trend

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31017843      PMCID: PMC6825522          DOI: 10.1080/10543406.2019.1607368

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biopharm Stat        ISSN: 1054-3406            Impact factor:   1.051


  20 in total

1.  Continuous Bayesian adaptive randomization based on event times with covariates by Cheung et al., Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:55-70.

Authors:  Rick Chappell; Theodore Karrison
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Early stopping of randomized clinical trials for overt efficacy is problematic.

Authors:  Dirk Bassler; Victor M Montori; Matthias Briel; Paul Glasziou; Gordon Guyatt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Phase II trial design with Bayesian adaptive randomization and predictive probability.

Authors:  Guosheng Yin; Nan Chen; J Jack Lee
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 1.864

Review 4.  Practical Bayesian adaptive randomisation in clinical trials.

Authors:  Peter F Thall; J Kyle Wathen
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 9.162

5.  Mass weighted urn design--A new randomization algorithm for unequal allocations.

Authors:  Wenle Zhao
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2015-06-17       Impact factor: 2.226

Review 6.  A group sequential, response-adaptive design for randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Theodore G Karrison; Dezheng Huo; Rick Chappell
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2003-10

7.  A response adaptive randomization platform trial for efficient evaluation of Ebola virus treatments: A model for pandemic response.

Authors:  Scott M Berry; Elizabeth A Petzold; Peter Dull; Nathan M Thielman; Coleen K Cunningham; G Ralph Corey; Micah T McClain; David L Hoover; James Russell; J McLeod Griffiss; Christopher W Woods
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 2.486

8.  Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages in comparative effectiveness trials: an example in status epilepticus.

Authors:  Jason T Connor; Jordan J Elm; Kristine R Broglio
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Response-adaptive designs for binary responses: How to offer patient benefit while being robust to time trends?

Authors:  Sofía S Villar; Jack Bowden; James Wason
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 1.894

10.  Do Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages for comparative effectiveness research? Protocol for the RE-ADAPT study.

Authors:  Jason T Connor; Bryan R Luce; Kristine R Broglio; K Jack Ishak; C Daniel Mullins; David J Vanness; Rachael Fleurence; Elijah Saunders; Barry R Davis
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-08-27       Impact factor: 2.486

View more
  3 in total

1.  Inference in response-adaptive clinical trials when the enrolled population varies over time.

Authors:  Massimiliano Russo; Steffen Ventz; Victoria Wang; Lorenzo Trippa
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 1.701

2.  Including non-concurrent control patients in the analysis of platform trials: is it worth it?

Authors:  Kim May Lee; James Wason
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  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

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.