Block urn design - A new randomization algorithm for sequential trials with two or more treatments and balanced or unbalanced allocation

Contemporary Clinical Trials

Volumn 32, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 953-961

  Zhao, Wenle ^a   Weng, Yanqiu ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Allocation randomness; Block urn design; Correct guess; Deterministic assignment; Randomization; Sequential clinical trial; Treatment imbalance

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; RANDOMIZATION; STUDY DESIGN;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROBABILITY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SELECTION BIAS;

EID: 80053383711     PISSN: 15517144     EISSN: 15592030     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2011.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Hill A.B. The Clinical trial. Br Med Bull 1951, 71:278-282.
2. Day S., Grouin J.M., Lewis J.A. Achieving balance in clinical trials. Appl Clin Trials 2005, 14:24-26.
3. Pond G.R., Tang P.A., Welch S.A., Chen E.X. Trends in the application of dynamic allocation methods in multi-arm cancer clinical trials. Clin Trials 2010, 7:227-234.
4. Matts J.P., Lachin J.M. Properties of Permuted-Block Randomization in Clinical Trials. Control Clin Trials 1988, 9:327-344.
5. Dupin-Spriet T., Fermanian J., Spriet A. Quantification of predictability in clinical trials using block randomization. Drug Inf J 2004, 38:127-133.
6. Zhao W., Weng Y. A simplified formula for quantification of the probability of deterministic assignments in permuted block randomization. J Stat Plann Inference 2011, 141:474-478.
7. Walton M. Clinical review for PLA 96-0350 Available at, accessed. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/HowDrugsareDevelopedandApproved/ApprovalApplications/TherapeuticBiologicApplications/ucm080832.pdf.
8. Berger V., Berger V. Selection bias and covariate imbalances. Randomized Clincal Trials 2005, John Wiley & Sons.
9. Efron B. Forcing a sequential experiment to be balanced. Biometrika 1971, 58:403-417.
10. Wei L.J. An application of an urn model to the design of sequential controlled clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc 1978, 73:559-563.
11. Wei L.J. A class of designs for sequential clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc 1977, 72:382-386.
12. Soares J.F., Wu C.F. Some restricted randomization rules in sequential designs. Commun Stat Theory Methods 1983, 12:2017-2034.
13. Smith R.L. Sequential treatment allocation using biased coin designs. J R Stat Soc B (Methodological) 1984, 46:519-543.
14. Chen Y.P. Biased coin design with imbalance tolerance. Commun Stat Stochastic Models 1999, 15:953-975.
15. Chen Y.P. Which design is better? Ehrenfest urn versus biased coin. Adv Appl Probab 2000, 32:738-749.
16. Antognini A.B. Extensions of Ehrenfest's urn designs for comparing two treatments. mODa 7. Contrib Stat 2004, 21-28.
17. W. Zhao, Y. Weng, Q. Wu, Y. Palesch, Quantitative comparison of randomization designs in sequential clinical trials based on treatment balance and allocation randomness, Pharm Stat 2011, doi:. http://doi:10.1002/pst.493.
18. Berger V.M., Ivanova A., Knoll M.D. Minimizing predictability while retaining balance through the use of less restrictive randomization procedures. Stat Med 2003, 22:3017-3028.
19. Salama I., Ivanova A., Qaqish B. Efficient generation of constrained block allocation sequences. Stat Med 2008, 27:1421-1428.
20. Kuznetsova O.M., Tymofyeyev Y. Brick tunnel randomization for unequal allocation to two or more treatment groups. Stat Med 2011, 30(8):812-824.
21. Rosenberger W.F., Lachin J.M., NetLibrary Inc. Randomization in clinical trials theory and practice 2002, Wiley, New York.
22. Blackwell D., Hodges J.L. Design for the control of selection bias. Ann Math Stat 1957, 28:449-460.
23. Kundt G. A new proposal for setting parameter values in restricted randomization methods. Methods Inf Med 2007, 46:440-449.
24. Rosenberger W.F., Lachin J.M. Randomization in Clinical Trials 2002, Wiley, New York.