A method for utilizing co-primary efficacy outcome measures to screen regimens for activity in two-stage Phase II clinical trials

Clinical Trials

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 385-395

  Sill, Michael W ^a,b   Rubinstein, Larry ^c   Litwin, Samuel ^d   Yothers, Greg ^e,f  

^a ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^c NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEVACIZUMAB;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOMETRY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RECURRENCE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG MECHANISM; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG TOLERABILITY; ENDOMETRIUM CANCER; FEMALE; HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; POWER ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROBABILITY OF EARLY TERMINATION; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; RANDOM SAMPLE; REFERENCE VALUE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ALGORITHMS; ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITORS; ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL, HUMANIZED; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II AS TOPIC; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; EARLY TERMINATION OF CLINICAL TRIALS; ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84865463175     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774512450101     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Gehan EA. 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: 346-53
2. Fleming TR. One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1982 ; 38: 143-51
3. Simon R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1989 ; 10: 1-10
4. Chen TT, Ng TH. Optimal flexible designs in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 1998 ; 17: 2301-12
5. Green SJ, Dahlberg S. Planned versus attained design in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 1992 ; 11: 853-62
6. Bryant J, Day R. Incorporating toxicity considerations into the design of two-stage phase II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1995 ; 51: 1372-83
7. Thall PF, Cheng SC. Optimal two-stage designs for clinical trials based on safety and efficacy. Stat Med. 2001 ; 20: 1023-32
8. Conaway MR, Petroni GR. Bivariate sequential designs for phase II trials. Biometrics. 1995 ; 51: 656-64
9. Zee B, Melnychuk D, Dancey J, Eisenhauer E. Multinomial phase II cancer trials incorporating response and early progression. J Biopharm Stat. 1999 ; 9: 351-63
10. Lu Y, Jin H, Lamborn KR. A design of phase II cancer trials using total and complete response endpoints. Stat Med. 2005 ; 24: 3155-70
11. Lin SP, Chen TT. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials with differentiation of complete and partial responses. Commun Stat A-Theor. 2000 ; 29: 923-40
12. Panageas KS, Smith A, Gonen M, Chapman PB. An optimal two-stage phase II design utilizing complete and partial response information separately. Control Clin Trials. 2002 ; 23: 367-79
13. Yu J, Kepner JL, Iyer R. Exact tests using two correlated binomial variables in contemporary cancer clinical trials. Biom J. 2009 ; 51: 899-914
14. Lin X, Allred R, Andrews G. A two-stage phase II trial design utilizing both primary and secondary endpoints. Pharm Stat. 2008 ; 7: 88-92
15. Thall PF, Simon RM, Estey EH. Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single-arm clinical trials with multiple outcomes. Stat Med. 1995 ; 14: 357-79
16. Stallard N, Thall PF, Whitehead J. Decision theoretic designs for phase II clinical trials with multiple outcomes. Biometrics. 1999 ; 55: 971-77
17. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA. 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. et al J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 ; 92: 205-16
18. Aghajanian C, Sill MW, Darcy KM. Phase II trial of bevacizumab in recurrent or persistent endometrial cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. et al J Clin Oncol. 2011 ; 29: 2259-65
19. Aghajanian C, Sill M, Darcy K. A phase II evaluation of bevacizumab in the treatment of recurrent or persistent endometrial cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) study. et al J Clin Oncol. 2009 ; 27: 284s
20. Schultz JR, Nichol FR, Elfring GL, Weed SD. Multiple-stage procedures for drug screening. Biometrics. 1973 ; 29: 293-300
21. Burger RA, Sill MW, Monk BJ, Greer BE, Sorosky JI. Phase II trial of bevacizumab in persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer or primary peritoneal cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 2007 ; 25: 5165-71
22. Sill MW, Yothers G A method for Utilizing Bivariate Efficacy Outcome Measures to Screen Agents for Activity in 2-stage Phase II Clinical Trials. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo ; 2006 :