Simulation study for evaluating the performance of response-adaptive randomization

Contemporary Clinical Trials

Volumn 40, Issue , 2015, Pages 15-25

  Du, Yining ^a,b   Wang, Xuan ^c   Jack Lee, J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c BAYLOR INSTITUTE FOR IMMUNOLOGY RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Allocation probability; Bayesian adaptive design; Efficacy early stopping; Operating characteristics; Patient horizon

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPARATIVE STUDY; EQUAL RANDOMIZATION; HUMAN; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; METHODOLOGY; PROBABILITY; RANDOMIZATION; RESPONSE ADAPTIVE RANDOMIZATION; SAMPLE SIZE; SIMULATION; STUDY DESIGN; COMPUTER SIMULATION; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL MODEL;

BAYES THEOREM; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84918529407     PISSN: 15517144     EISSN: 15592030     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2014.11.006     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Berry D.A. Bayesian statistics and the efficiency and ethics of clinical trials. Stat Sci 2004, 19:175-187.
2. Zelen M. Play the winner rule and the controlled clinical trial. J Am Stat Assoc 1969, 64:131-146.
3. 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.
4. Rosenberger W.F., Lachin J.M. Randomization in clinical trials: theory and practice 2002, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
5. Hu F.F., Zhang L.X. Asymptotic properties of double adaptive biased coin designs for multi-treatment clinical trials. Ann Stat 2004, 32:268-301.
6. Rosenberger W.F., Vidyashankar A.N., Agarwal D.K. Covariate-adjusted response-adaptive designs for binary response. J Biopharm Stat 2001, 11:227-236.
7. Zhang L.X., Chan W.S., Cheung S.H., Hu F.F. A generalized drop-the-loser urn for clinical trials with delayed responses. Stat Sin 2007, 17:387-409.
8. Bai Z.D., Hu F.F., Rosenberger W.F. Asymptotic properties of adaptive designs for clinical trials with delayed response. Ann Stat 2002, 30:122-139.
9. Morgan C.C., Coad D.S. A comparison of adaptive allocation rules for group-sequential binary response clinical trials. Stat Med 2007, 26:1937-1954.
10. Thompson W.R. On the likelihood that one unknown probability exceeds another in view of the evidence of two samples. Biometrika 1933, 25:285-294.
11. Korn E.L., Freidlin B. Outcome-adaptive randomization: is it useful?. J Clin Oncol 2011, 29:771-776.
12. Lee J.J., Chen N., Yin G. Worth adapting? Revising the usefulness of outcome-adaptive randomization. Clin Cancer Res 2012, 18:4498-4507.
13. Anscombe F.J. Sequential medical trials (with discussion). J Am Stat Assoc 1963, 58:365-387.
14. Thall P.F., Wathen J.K. Practical Bayesian adaptive randomization in clinical trials. Eur J Cancer 2007, 43:859-866.
15. Lee J.J., Gu X.M., Liu S.Y. Bayesian adaptive randomization designs for targeted agent development. Clin Trials 2010, 7:584-596.
16. Wathen J.K., Cook J.D. Power and bias in adaptive randomized clinical trials. Technical report UTMDABTR-002-06 2006.
17. Yin G., Chen N., Lee J.J. Phase II trial design with Bayesian adaptive randomization and predictive probability. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 2012, 61:219-235.
18. Thall P.F., Simon R. Practical Bayesian guidelines for phase IIb clinical trials. Biometrics 1994, 50:337-349.
19. Melfi V.F., Page C., Geraldes M. An adaptive randomized design with application to estimation. Can J Stat 2001, 29:107-116.