Exact two-stage designs for phase II activity trials with rank-based endpoints

Contemporary Clinical Trials

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 332-341

  Wilding, Gregory E ^a   Shan, Guogen ^a   Hutson, Alan D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Exact test; Mann Whitney test; Minimax design; Nonparametric; Optimal design; Phase II design

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; ETHICS; EXPERIMENTAL THERAPY; KNOWLEDGE; LITERATURE; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PLANNING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RANK SUM TEST;

CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II AS TOPIC; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84856228999     PISSN: 15517144     EISSN: 15592030     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2011.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Fleming T.R. One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 1982, 38:143-151.
2. Simon R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1989, 10:1-10.
3. Gehan E.A. The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chronic Dis 1961, 13:346-353.
4. Green S.J., Dahlberg S. Planned versus attained design in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 1992, 11:853-862.
5. Chen T.T., Ng T.H. Optimal flexible designs in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 1998, 17:2301-2312.
6. Storer B.E. A class of phase II designs with three possible outcomes. Biometrics 1992, 48:55-60.
7. Kepner J., Chang M.N. On the maximum total sample size of a group sequential test about binomial proportions. Stat Probab Lett 2003, 62:87-92.
8. Mariani L., Marubini E. Design and analysis of phase II cancer trials: a review of statistical methods and guidelines for medical researchers. Int Stat Rev 1996, 64:61-88.
9. Green S., Crowley J., Benedetti J., Smith A. Clinical trials in oncology 2002, Chapman and Hall/CRC, [2nd edition]. 2nd edition.
10. Lavin P.T. An alternative model for the evaluation of antitumor activity. Cancer Clin Trials 1981, 4:451-457.
11. Karrison T.G., Maitland M.L., Stadler W.M., Ratain M.J. Design of phase II cancer trials using a continuous endpoint of change in tumor size: application to a study of sorafenib and erlotinib in non small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007, 99:1455-1461.
12. Wason J.M., Mander A.P., Eisen T.G. Reducing sample sizes in two-stage phase II cancer trials by using continuous tumour shrinkage end-points. Eur J Cancer 2011, 47:983-989.
13. Therasse P., Arbuck S.G., Eisenhauer E.A., Wanders J., Kaplan R.S., Rubinstein L., et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:205-216.
14. Simon R., Wittes R.E., Ellenberg S.S. Randomized phase II clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rep 1985, 69:1375-1381.
15. Lee J.J., Feng L. Randomized phase II designs in cancer clinical trials: current status and future directions. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:4450-4457.
16. Rubinstein L.V., Korn E.L., Freidlin B., Hunsberger S., Ivy S.P., Smith M.A. Design issues of randomized phase II trials and a proposal for phase II screening trials. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:7199-7206.
17. Taylor J.M.G., Braun T.M., Li Z. Comparing an experimental agent to a standard agent: relative merits of a one-arm or randomized two-arm phase II design. Clin Trials 2006, 3:335-348.
18. Rubinstein L., Crowley J., Ivy P., LeBlanc M., Sargent D. Randomized phase II designs. Clin Cancer Res 2009, 15:1883-1890.
19. Kepner J.L. On group sequential designs comparing two binomial proportions. J Biopharm Stat 2010, 20:145-159.
20. Mann H.B., Whitney D.R. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann Math Stat 1947, 18:50-60.
21. Hornik K. Wilcoxon rank sum statistic in R package version 2.10-1 2010.
22. Castagliola P. Optimized algorithms for computing Wilcoxon's Tn, Wilcoxon's Wm, n and Ansari-Bradley's Am, n statistics when m and n are small. J Appl Stat 1996, 23:41-58.
23. Shuster J.J., Chang M.N., Tian L. Design of group sequential clinical trials with ordinal categorical data based on the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon Test. Sequential Anal 2004, 23:413-426.
24. Spurrier J.D., Hewett J.E. Two-stage Wilcoxon tests of hypotheses. J Am Stat Assoc 1976, 71:982-987.
25. Lehmann E.L. Nonparametrics statistical methods based on ranks 1975.
26. Wilcoxon F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bull 1945, 1:80-83.
27. Spurrier J.D., Hewett J.E. Wilcoxon rank sum statistic 1975, [Technical Report No. 62 G10-1], Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of South Carolina.
28. Jennison C., Turnbull B.W. Group sequential methods (Chapman & Hall/CRC Interdisciplinary Statistics) 1999, Chapman and Hall/CRC. 1 edition.
29. Hollander M., Wolfe D.A. Nonparametric statistical methods 1999, Wiley-Interscience, [2 edition]. 2nd Edition.
30. Chen T.T. Optimal three-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 1997, 16:2701-2711.