Randomized Phase II clinical trials

Sin Ho Jung, Daniel J. Sargent

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Traditionally, Phase II trials have been conducted as single-arm trials to compare the response probabilities between an experimental therapy and a historical control. Historical control data, however, often have a small sample size, are collected from a different patient population, or use a different response assessment method, so that a direct comparison between a historical control and an experimental therapy may be severely biased. Randomized Phase II trials entering patients prospectively to both experimental and control arms have been proposed to avoid any bias in such cases. The small sample sizes for typical Phase II clinical trials imply that the use of exact statistical methods for their design and analysis is appropriate. In this article, we propose two-stage randomized Phase II trials based on Fishers exact test, which does not require specification of the response probability of the control arm for testing. Through numerical studies, we observe that the proposed method controls the type I error accurately and maintains a high power. If we specify the response probabilities of the two arms under the alternative hypothesis, we can identify good randomized Phase II trial designs by adopting the Simons minimax and optimal design concepts that were developed for single-arm Phase II trials.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)802-816
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics
Volume24
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 4 2014

Fingerprint

Phase II Clinical Trials
Clinical Trials
Investigational Therapies
Randomized Controlled Trials
Sample Size
Small Sample Size
Therapy
Fisher's Exact Test
Type I error
Exact Method
Minimax
High Power
Statistical method
Population
Biased
Numerical Study
Specification
Imply
Testing
Alternatives

Keywords

  • Fisher's exact test
  • Minimax design
  • Optimal design
  • Two-stage design
  • Unbalanced allocation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Pharmacology
  • Statistics and Probability
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Randomized Phase II clinical trials. / Jung, Sin Ho; Sargent, Daniel J.

In: Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, Vol. 24, No. 4, 04.07.2014, p. 802-816.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jung, Sin Ho ; Sargent, Daniel J. / Randomized Phase II clinical trials. In: Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics. 2014 ; Vol. 24, No. 4. pp. 802-816.
@article{7df7950d549d4ec4bcfc80cb223d474e,
title = "Randomized Phase II clinical trials",
abstract = "Traditionally, Phase II trials have been conducted as single-arm trials to compare the response probabilities between an experimental therapy and a historical control. Historical control data, however, often have a small sample size, are collected from a different patient population, or use a different response assessment method, so that a direct comparison between a historical control and an experimental therapy may be severely biased. Randomized Phase II trials entering patients prospectively to both experimental and control arms have been proposed to avoid any bias in such cases. The small sample sizes for typical Phase II clinical trials imply that the use of exact statistical methods for their design and analysis is appropriate. In this article, we propose two-stage randomized Phase II trials based on Fishers exact test, which does not require specification of the response probability of the control arm for testing. Through numerical studies, we observe that the proposed method controls the type I error accurately and maintains a high power. If we specify the response probabilities of the two arms under the alternative hypothesis, we can identify good randomized Phase II trial designs by adopting the Simons minimax and optimal design concepts that were developed for single-arm Phase II trials.",
keywords = "Fisher's exact test, Minimax design, Optimal design, Two-stage design, Unbalanced allocation",
author = "Jung, {Sin Ho} and Sargent, {Daniel J.}",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
day = "4",
doi = "10.1080/10543406.2014.901343",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "802--816",
journal = "Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics",
issn = "1054-3406",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomized Phase II clinical trials

AU - Jung, Sin Ho

AU - Sargent, Daniel J.

PY - 2014/7/4

Y1 - 2014/7/4

N2 - Traditionally, Phase II trials have been conducted as single-arm trials to compare the response probabilities between an experimental therapy and a historical control. Historical control data, however, often have a small sample size, are collected from a different patient population, or use a different response assessment method, so that a direct comparison between a historical control and an experimental therapy may be severely biased. Randomized Phase II trials entering patients prospectively to both experimental and control arms have been proposed to avoid any bias in such cases. The small sample sizes for typical Phase II clinical trials imply that the use of exact statistical methods for their design and analysis is appropriate. In this article, we propose two-stage randomized Phase II trials based on Fishers exact test, which does not require specification of the response probability of the control arm for testing. Through numerical studies, we observe that the proposed method controls the type I error accurately and maintains a high power. If we specify the response probabilities of the two arms under the alternative hypothesis, we can identify good randomized Phase II trial designs by adopting the Simons minimax and optimal design concepts that were developed for single-arm Phase II trials.

AB - Traditionally, Phase II trials have been conducted as single-arm trials to compare the response probabilities between an experimental therapy and a historical control. Historical control data, however, often have a small sample size, are collected from a different patient population, or use a different response assessment method, so that a direct comparison between a historical control and an experimental therapy may be severely biased. Randomized Phase II trials entering patients prospectively to both experimental and control arms have been proposed to avoid any bias in such cases. The small sample sizes for typical Phase II clinical trials imply that the use of exact statistical methods for their design and analysis is appropriate. In this article, we propose two-stage randomized Phase II trials based on Fishers exact test, which does not require specification of the response probability of the control arm for testing. Through numerical studies, we observe that the proposed method controls the type I error accurately and maintains a high power. If we specify the response probabilities of the two arms under the alternative hypothesis, we can identify good randomized Phase II trial designs by adopting the Simons minimax and optimal design concepts that were developed for single-arm Phase II trials.

KW - Fisher's exact test

KW - Minimax design

KW - Optimal design

KW - Two-stage design

KW - Unbalanced allocation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84901316179&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84901316179&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10543406.2014.901343

DO - 10.1080/10543406.2014.901343

M3 - Article

C2 - 24697589

AN - SCOPUS:84901316179

VL - 24

SP - 802

EP - 816

JO - Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics

JF - Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics

SN - 1054-3406

IS - 4

ER -