AN OPTIMAL 3-STAGE DESIGN FOR PHASE-II CLINICAL-TRIALS

被引:84
作者
ENSIGN, LG [1 ]
GEHAN, EA [1 ]
KAMEN, DS [1 ]
THALL, PF [1 ]
机构
[1] UNIV TEXAS,MD ANDERSON CANC CTR,DEPT BIOMATH,HOUSTON,TX 77030
关键词
D O I
10.1002/sim.4780131704
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
A phase II clinical trial in cancer therapeutics is usually a single-arm study to determine whether an experimental treatment (E) holds sufficient promise to warrant further testing. When the criterion of treatment efficacy is a binary endpoint (response/no response) with probability of response p, we propose a three-stage optimal design for testing H-0:p less than or equal to p(0) versus H-1:p greater than or equal to p(1), where p(1) and p(0) are response rates such that E does or does not merit further testing at given levels of statistical significance (alpha) and power (1 - beta). The proposed design is essentially a combination of earlier proposals by Gehan and Simon. The design stops with rejection of H-1 at stage 1 when there is an initial moderately long run of consecutive treatment failures; otherwise there is continuation to stage 2 and (possibly) stage 3 which have decision rules analogous to those in stages 1 and 2 of Simon's design. Thus, rejection of H-1 is possible at any stage, but acceptance only at the final stage. The design is optimal in the sense that expected sample size is minimized when p = p(0), subject to the practical constraint that the minimum stage 1 sample size is at least 5. The proposed design has greatest utility when the true response rate of E is small, it is desirable to stop early if there is a moderately long run of early treatment failures, and it is practical to implement a three-stage design. Compared to Simon's optimal two-stage design, the optimal three-stage design has the following features: stage 1 is the same size or smaller and has the possibility of stopping earlier when 0 successes are observed; the expected sample size under the null hypothesis is smaller; stages 1 and 2 generally have more patients than stage 1 of the two-stage design, but a higher probability of early termination under H-0; and the total sample size and criteria for rejection of H-1 at stage 3 are similar to the corresponding values at the end of stage 2 in the two-stage optimal design.
引用
收藏
页码:1727 / 1736
页数:10
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]   DESIGNS FOR GROUP SEQUENTIAL PHASE-II CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
CHANG, MN ;
THERNEAU, TM ;
WIEAND, HS ;
CHA, SS .
BIOMETRICS, 1987, 43 (04) :865-874
[2]   ONE-SAMPLE MULTIPLE TESTING PROCEDURE FOR PHASE-II CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
FLEMING, TR .
BIOMETRICS, 1982, 38 (01) :143-151
[3]   DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PATIENTS REQUIRED IN A PRELIMINARY AND A FOLLOW-UP TRIAL OF A NEW CHEMOTHERAPEUTIC AGENT [J].
GEHAN, EA .
JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1961, 13 (04) :346-&
[4]  
HERSON J, 1984, CANCER CLIN TRIALS M
[5]  
LEE YJ, 1986, CLIN TRIALS ONCOLOGY
[6]  
MARSONI S, 1987, CANCER TREAT REP, V71, P71
[7]   PHASE-II TRIAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR SMALL-CELL LUNG-CANCER [J].
MOORE, TD ;
KORN, EL .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1992, 84 (03) :150-154
[8]  
SIMON R, 1987, CANCER TREAT REP, V71, P1079
[9]   OPTIMAL 2-STAGE DESIGNS FOR PHASE-II CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
SIMON, R .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1989, 10 (01) :1-10
[10]  
THALL PF, IN PRESS BIOMETRICS