Comparisons of minimization and Atkinson's algorithm

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 7-8, 2010, Pages 721-730

  Senn, Stephen ^a   Anisimov, Vladimir V ^b   Fedorov, Valerii V ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^b GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United Kingdom)

^c GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Covariates; Dynamic allocation; Optimal design; Randomization

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; ATKINSON ALGORITHM; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COVARIANCE; GEOMETRY; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MONTE CARLO METHOD; RANDOMIZATION; SIMULATION;

ADRENAL CORTEX HORMONES; ALGORITHMS; ASTHMA; BIOSTATISTICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PATIENT SELECTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 77949410433     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3763     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Altman DG. Comparability of randomized groups. Statistician 1985; 34:125-136.
2. Senn SJ. Covariate imbalance and random allocation in clinical trials [see comments]. Statistics in Medicine 1989; 8:467-475.
3. Senn SJ. Testing for baseline balance in clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 1994; 13:1715-1726.
4. Berger VW. Selection Bias and Covariate Imbalances in Randomized Clinical Trials. Wiley: Chichester, 2005.
5. Weir CJ, Lees KR. Comparison of stratification and adaptive methods for treatment allocation in an acute stroke clinical trial. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22:705-726.
6. Fedorov V, Jones B. The design of multicentre trials. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2005; 14:205-248.
7. Senn SJ. Some controversies in planning and analysing multi-centre trials. Statistics in Medicine 1998; 17:1753-1765. Discussion, 1799-1800.
8. Anisimov VV, Fedorov VV. Modelling, prediction and adaptive adjustment of recruitment in multicentre trials. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:4958-4975.
9. Anisimov VV, Fedorov VV. Design of multicentre clinical trials with random enrolment. In Advances in Statistical Methods for the Health Sciences: Applications to Cancer and Aids Studies, Genome Sequence Analysis, and Survival Analysis, Auget JL, Balakrishnan N, Mesbah M, Molenberghs G (eds). Birkhauser: Boston, Cambridge, 2007; 387-400.
10. Taves DR. Minimization: a new method of assigning patients to treatment and control groups. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 1974; 15:443-453.
11. Pocock SJ, Simon R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 1975; 31:103-115.
12. Buyse M. Eurocode - A new approach to collaborative research in clinical oncology. European Journal of Cancer and Clinical Oncology 1989; 25:1905-1906.
13. Treasure T, MacRae KD. Minimisation: the platinum standard for trials? Randomisation doesn't guarantee similarity of groups; minimisation does. BMJ 1998; 317:362-363.
14. Altman DG, Bland JM. Treatment allocation by minimisation. BMJ 2005; 330:843.
15. CPMP, Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP): Points to consider on adjustment for baseline covariates, European Medicines Evaluation Agency, London, 2003; 1-10.
16. CPMP, Committee for proprietary medicinal products (CPMP): points to consider on adjustment for baseline covariates. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23:701-709.
17. Day S, Groulin J-M, Lewis JA. Achieving balance in clinical trials. Applied Clinical Trials 2005; 14:24-26.
18. Senn SJ. Added values: controversies concerning randomization and additivity in clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23:3729-3753.
19. Buyse M, McEntegart D. Achieving balance in clinical trials. Applied Clinical Trials 2004; 13:36-40.
20. Senn SJ. Unbalanced claims for balance. Applied Clinical Trials 2004; 13:15-16.
21. Smith RL. Sequential treatment allocation using biased coin designs. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B - Methodological 1984; 46:519-543.
22. Anthony Atkinson C. Optimum biased coin designs for sequential clinical-trials with prognostic factors. Biometrika 1982; 69:61-67.
23. Harville DA. Nearly optimal allocation of experimental units using observed covariate values. Technometrics 1974; 16:589-599.
24. Cook RD, Thibodeau LA. Marginally restricted D-optimal designs. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1980; 75:366-371.
25. Cook D, Fedorov V. Constrained optimization of experimental-design. Statistics 1995; 26:129-178.
26. Atkinson AC. The comparison of designs for sequential clinical trials with covariate information. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A - Statistics in Society 2002; 165:349-373.
27. Rosenberger WF, Lachin JM. Randomization in Clinical Trials: Theory and Practice. Wiley: New York, 2002.
28. Heritier S, Gebski V, Pillai A. Dynamic balancing randomization in controlled clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 2005; 24:3729-3741.
29. Gicquel S, Marion-Gallois R. Randomization with a posteriori constraints: description and properties. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:5033-5045.
30. Berger VW. Selection bias and baseline imbalances in randomized trials. Drug Information Journal 2004; 38:1-2.
31. Rosenberger WF, Sverdlov O. Handling covariates in the design of clinical trials. Statistical Science 2008; 23(4):404-419.
32. Burman C-F. On sequential treatment allocations in clinical trials. Ph.D. Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, 1996.
33. Kalish LA, Begg CB. Treatment allocation methods in clinical-trials-a review. Statistics in Medicine 1985; 4:129-144.
34. Rao CR. Linear Statistical Inference and its Applications. Wiley: New York, 2002.
35. Schott JR. Matrix Analysis for Statistics. Wiley: New York, 1997.
36. Fedorov VV. Theory of Optimal Experiments. Academic Press: New York, 1972.
37. McEntegart D. The pursuit of balance using stratified and dynamic randomization techniques: an overview. Drug Information Journal 2003; 37:293-308.