Abstract
During the development of new therapies, it is not uncommon to test whether a new treatment works better than the existing treatment for all patients who suffer from a condition (full population) or for a subset of the full population (subpopulation). One approach that may be used for this objective is to have two separate trials, where in the first trial, data are collected to determine if the new treatment benefits the full population or the subpopulation. The second trial is a confirmatory trial to test the new treatment in the population selected in the first trial. In this paper, we consider the more efficient two-stage adaptive seamless designs (ASDs), where in stage 1, data are collected to select the population to test in stage 2. In stage 2, additional data are collected to perform confirmatory analysis for the selected population. Unlike the approach that uses two separate trials, for ASDs, stage 1 data are also used in the confirmatory analysis. Although ASDs are efficient, using stage 1 data both for selection and confirmatory analysis introduces selection bias and consequently statistical challenges in making inference. We will focus on point estimation for such trials. In this paper, we describe the extent of bias for estimators that ignore multiple hypotheses and selecting the population that is most likely to give positive trial results based on observed stage 1 data. We then derive conditionally unbiased estimators and examine their mean squared errors for different scenarios.
Keywords
adaptive seamless designs
multi-arm multi-stage trials
phase II/III clinical trials
subgroup analysis
subpopulation
MeSH Terms
Bias
Biometry/methods
Computer Simulation
Humans
Patient Selection
Prevalence
Principal Component Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods
Research Design
Authors & Affiliations
3 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Kimani Peter K
Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, U.K.
Todd Susan
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Reading, RG6 6AX, Reading, U.K.
Stallard Nigel
Warwick Medical School, The University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, U.K.
References (25)
25 references, click to expand
-
Confirmatory adaptive designs with Bayesian decision tools for a targeted therapy in oncology.
Stat Med. 2009 May 1;28(10):1445-63
PMID: 19266565
-
Estimation after subpopulation selection in adaptive seamless trials.
Stat Med. 2015 Aug 15;34(18):2581-601
PMID: 25903293
-
An adaptive seamless phase II/III design for oncology trials with subpopulation selection using correlated survival endpoints.
Pharm Stat. 2011 Jul-Aug;10(4):347-56
PMID: 22328327
-
Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials with subgroup selection.
J Biopharm Stat. 2014;24(1):168-87
PMID: 24392984
-
Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Apr 1;26(10):1626-34
PMID: 18316791
-
Testing and estimation in flexible group sequential designs with adaptive treatment selection.
Stat Med. 2005 Dec 30;24(24):3697-714
PMID: 16320264
-
Efficacy and safety of donepezil in patients with more severe Alzheimer's disease: a subgroup analysis from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005 Jun;20(6):559-69
PMID: 15920715
-
Unbiased estimation of selected treatment means in two-stage trials.
Biom J. 2008 Aug;50(4):515-27
PMID: 18663760
-
Combining different phases in the development of medical treatments within a single trial.
Stat Med. 1999 Jul 30;18(14):1833-48
PMID: 10407255
-
A comparison of methods for constructing confidence intervals after phase II/III clinical trials.
Biom J. 2014 Jan;56(1):107-28
PMID: 24173686
-
An improved method of evaluating drug effect in a multiple dose clinical trial.
Stat Med. 2001 Jul 15;20(13):1913-29
PMID: 11427949
-
Sequential designs for phase III clinical trials incorporating treatment selection.
Stat Med. 2003 Mar 15;22(5):689-703
PMID: 12587100
-
Galantamine: a randomized, double-blind, dose comparison in patients with Alzheimer's disease.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2001 Sep;16(9):852-7
PMID: 11571763
-
Efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation for refractory epilepsy among patient subgroups: a re-analysis using the Engel classification.
Seizure. 2011 May;20(4):331-5
PMID: 21273097
-
Selection and bias--two hostile brothers.
Stat Med. 2010 Jan 15;29(1):1-13
PMID: 19844944
-
Simultaneous confidence intervals that are compatible with closed testing in adaptive designs.
Biometrika. 2013 Dec 1;100(4):985-996
PMID: 27019516
-
Dose selection in seamless phase II/III clinical trials based on efficacy and safety.
Stat Med. 2009 Mar 15;28(6):917-36
PMID: 19152231
-
Adjusted significance levels for subgroup analyses in clinical trials.
Contemp Clin Trials. 2010 Nov;31(6):647-56
PMID: 20832503
-
Shrinkage estimation in two-stage adaptive designs with midtrial treatment selection.
Stat Med. 2013 May 10;32(10):1677-90
PMID: 22744936
-
A conditional error function approach for subgroup selection in adaptive clinical trials.
Stat Med. 2012 Dec 30;31(30):4309-20
PMID: 22865774
-
Practical guidelines for adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trials that use Bayesian methods.
Stat Med. 2012 Aug 30;31(19):2068-85
PMID: 22437262
-
Conditionally unbiased estimation in phase II/III clinical trials with early stopping for futility.
Stat Med. 2013 Jul 30;32(17):2893-910
PMID: 23413228
-
Cementless total hip arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis in patients aged 55 years and older.
Acta Orthop. 2010 Feb;81(1):42-52
PMID: 20180718
-
Interval estimation in two-stage, drop-the-losers clinical trials with flexible treatment selection.
Stat Med. 2011 Oct 15;30(23):2804-14
PMID: 21823142
-
Confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trials with hypotheses selection at interim: general concepts.
Biom J. 2006 Aug;48(4):623-34
PMID: 16972714