A review of statistical designs for improving the efficiency of phase II studies in oncology

Statistical Methods in Medical Research

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 1010-1021

  Wason, James M S ^a   Jaki, Thomas ^b  

^a MRC BIOSTATISTICS UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^b LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

augmented methods; continuous; multi stage; oncology; phase II; RECIST

Indexed keywords

CANCER THERAPY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; HUMAN; ONCOLOGY; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL; RESPONSE EVALUATION CRITERIA IN SOLID TUMORS; RUNNING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASM; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PROCEDURES;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II AS TOPIC; HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; NEOPLASMS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84970951855     PISSN: 09622802     EISSN: 14770334     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0962280215588247     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Kola I, Landis J,. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2004; 3: 711-716.
2. DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG,. Economics of new oncology drug development. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 209-216.
3. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, et al. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981; 47: 207-214.
4. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 205-216.
5. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 228-247.
6. Arnold DM, Burns KE, Adhikari NK, et al. The design and interpretation of pilot trials in clinical research in critical care. Crit Care Med 2009; 37: S69-S74.
7. Machin D, Campbell MJ, Tan SB, et al. Sample size tables for clinical studies, Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
8. Simon R,. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 1-10.
9. Lee JJ, Feng L,. Randomized phase II designs in cancer clinical trials: current status and future directions. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 4450-4457.
10. Jaki T,. Uptake of novel statistical methods for early-phase clinical studies in the UK public sector. Clin Trials 2013; 10: 344-346.
11. Shuster J,. Optimal two-stage designs for single arm phase II cancer trials. J Biopharm Stat 2002; 12: 39-51.
12. Mander AP, Thompson SG,. Two-stage designs optimal under the alternative hypothesis for phase II cancer clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2010; 31: 572-578.
13. Jung S-H, Lee T, Kim K, et al. Admissible two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 2004; 23: 561-569.
14. Mander AP, Wason JMS, Sweeting MJ, et al. Admissible two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials that incorporate the expected sample size under the alternative hypothesis. Pharm Stat 2012; 11: 91-96.
15. Bowden J, Wason J,. Identifying combined design and analysis procedures in two-stage trials with a binary end point. Stat Med 2012; 31: 3874-3884.
16. Ensign LG, Gehan EA, Kamen DS, et al. An optimal three-stage design for phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 1994; 13: 1727-1736.
17. Chen TT,. Optimal three-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 1997; 16: 2701-2711.
18. Chen K, Shan M,. Optimal and minimax three-stage designs for phase II oncology clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2008; 29: 32-41.
19. Jennison C, Turnbull BW,. Group sequential methods with applications to clinical trials, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1999.
20. Schaid DJ, Wieand SAM, Therneau TM,. Optimal two-stage screening designs for survival comparisons. Biometrika 1990; 77: 507-513.
21. Wason J, Mander AP, Thompson SG,. Optimal multistage designs for randomised clinical trials with continuous outcomes. Stat Med 2012; 31: 301-312.
22. Stallard N, Todd S,. Sequential designs for phase III clinical trials incorporating treatment selection. Stat Med 2003; 22: 689-703.
23. Magirr D, Jaki T, Whitehead J,. A generalized Dunnett test for multi-arm multi-stage clinical studies with treatment selection. Biometrika 2012; 99: 494-501.
24. Wason J, Jaki T,. Optimal design of multi-arm multi-stage trials. Stat Med 2012; 31: 4269-4279.
25. Wason JM,. Reducing the average number of patients needed in a phase II trial through novel design. Clin Res Regul Affairs 2013; 30: 47-54.
26. Wason J, Magirr D, Law M, et al. Some recommendations for multi-arm multi-stage trials. Stat Methods Med Res 2012.
27. McCullagh P,. Regression models for ordinal data. J R Stat Soc Ser B 1980; 42 (2): 109-142.
28. Agresti A. Analysis of ordinal categorical data. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
29. Whitehead J,. Sample size calculations for ordered categorical data. Stat Med 1993; 12: 2257-2271.
30. Whitehead J, Jaki T,. One- and two-stage design proposals for a phase II trial comparing three active treatments with control using an ordered categorical endpoint. Stat Med 2009; 28: 828-847.
31. Lavin PT,. An alternative model for the evaluation of antitumor activity. Cancer Clin Trials 1980; 4: 451-457.
32. Karrison TG, Maitland ML, Stadler WM, et al. 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.
33. Altman DG, Royston P,. Statistics notes: the cost of dichotomising continuous variables. BMJ 2006; 332: 1080.
34. Jaki T, Andre V, Su TL, et al. Designing exploratory cancer trials using change in tumour size as primary endpoint. Stat Med 2013; 32: 2544-2554.
35. Collett D,. Modelling survival data in medical research, Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2003.
36. Wason J, Seaman SR,. Using continuous data on tumour measurements to improve inference in phase II cancer studies. Stat Med 2013; 32: 4639-4650.
37. Panageas KS, Smith A, Gönen M, et al. An optimal two-stage phase II design utilizing complete and partial response information separately. Control Clin Trials 2002; 23: 367-379.
38. Thall PF, Simon R, Ellenberg SS,. Two-stage selection and testing designs for comparative clinical trials. Biometrika 1988; 75: 303-310.
39. Bratton DJ, Phillips PP, Parmar MK,. A multi-arm multi-stage clinical trial design for binary outcomes with application to tuberculosis. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013; 13: 139.
40. Jaki T, Magirr D,. Considerations on covariates and endpoints in multi-arm multi-stage clinical trials selecting all promising treatments. Stat Med 2013; 32: 1150-1163.
41. Molenberghs G and Kenward M. Missing data in clinical studies. 61st ed. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
42. Bauer P, Koenig F, Brannath W, et al. Selection and bias-two hostile brothers. Stat Med 2010; 29: 1-13.
43. Emerson SS, Fleming TR,. Parameter estimation following group sequential hypothesis testing. Biometrika 1990; 77: 875-892.