Bayesian dose selection design for a binary outcome using restricted response adaptive randomization

Trials

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Meinzer, Caitlyn ^a   Martin, Renee ^a   Suarez, Jose I ^b  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Adaptive design; Bayesian design; Clinical trial; Dose selection; Phase II; Response adaptive randomization

Indexed keywords

ALBUMIN; PLACEBO; ALB PROTEIN, HUMAN; HUMAN SERUM ALBUMIN; NEUROPROTECTIVE AGENT;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE CALCULATION; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG DOSE ESCALATION; DRUG DOSE INCREASE; DRUG SAFETY; HUMAN; NULL HYPOTHESIS; OPTIMAL DRUG DOSE; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PROBABILITY SAMPLE; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; RANDOMIZATION; RESTRICTED RESPONSE RANDOMIZATION; RISK FACTOR; SAMPLE SIZE; SUBARACHNOID HEMORRHAGE; CLINICAL TRIAL; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; METHODOLOGY; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PILOT STUDY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ALGORITHMS; BAYES THEOREM; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DRUG DOSAGE CALCULATIONS; HUMANS; INFUSIONS, INTRAVENOUS; NEUROPROTECTIVE AGENTS; PILOT PROJECTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RESEARCH DESIGN; SERUM ALBUMIN, HUMAN; SUBARACHNOID HEMORRHAGE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85028932163     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17456215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2004-6     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Thall PF, Russell KE. A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes in phase I/II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1998; 54(1):251-64.
2. Simon R, Wittes R, Ellenberg S. Randomized phase II clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rep. 1985; 69(12):1375-81.
3. Bretz F, Hsu J, Pinheiro J, Liu Y. Dose finding-a challenge in statistics. Biom J. 2008; 50(4):480-504.
4. Whitehead J. Designing phase II studies in the context of a programme of clinical research. Biometrics. 1985; 41(2):373-83.
5. Whitehead J. Sample sizes for phase II and phase III clinical trials: an integrated approach. Stat Med. 1986; 5(5):459-64.
6. Wason J, Jaki T, Stallard N. Planning multi-arm screening studies within the context of a drug development program. Stat Med. 2013; 32(20):3424-35.
7. Meurer WJ, Lewis RJ, Tagle D, Fetters MD, Legocki L, Berry S, Connor J, Durkalski V, Elm J, Zhao W, et al. An overview of the Adaptive Designs Accelerating Promising Trials Into Treatments (ADAPT-IT) project. Ann Emerg Med. 2012; 60(4):451-7.
8. Legocki LJ, Meurer WJ, Frederiksen S, Lewis RJ, Durkalski VL, Berry DA, Barsan WG, Fetters MD. Clinical trialist perspectives on the ethics of adaptive clinical trials: a mixed-methods analysis. BMC Med Ethics. 2015; 16(1):1.
9. Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Dmitrienko A, Enas G, Gaydos B, Hsu CH, König F, Krams M, Liu Q, Neuenschwander B, et al. Innovative approaches for designing and analyzing adaptive dose-ranging trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2007; 17(6):965-95.
10. Berry SM, Spinelli W, Littman GS, Liang JZ, Fardipour P, Berry DA, Lewis RJ, Krams M. A Bayesian dose-finding trial with adaptive dose expansion to flexibly assess efficacy and safety of an investigational drug. Clin Trials. 2010; 7(2):121-35.
11. Thall P, Fox P, Wathen J. Statistical controversies in clinical research: scientific and ethical problems with adaptive randomization in comparative clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2015; 26(8):238.
12. Rosenberger WF, Hu F. Maximizing power and minimizing treatment failures in clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2004; 1(2):141-7.
13. Hu F, Rosenberger WF. Optimality, variability, power: evaluating response-adaptive randomization procedures for treatment comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc. 2003; 98(463):671-8.
14. Rosenberger WF, Stallard N, Ivanova A, Harper CN, Ricks ML. Optimal adaptive designs for binary response trials. Biometrics. 2001; 57(3):909-13.
15. Zhao W, Durkalski V. Managing competing demands in the implementation of response-adaptive randomization in a large multicenter phase III acute stroke trial. Stat Med. 2014; 33(23):4043-52.
16. Hey SP, Kimmelman J. Are outcome-adaptive allocation trials ethical?Clin Trials. 2015; 12(2):102-6.
17. Thall PF, Wathen JK. Practical Bayesian adaptive randomisation in clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2007; 43(5):859-66.
18. Connor JT, Elm JJ, Broglio KR, ESETT, Investigators AI, et al. Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages in comparative effectiveness trials: an example in status epilepticus. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66(8):130-7.
19. Yin G, Chen N, Jack Lee J. Phase II trial design with Bayesian adaptive randomization and predictive probability. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2012; 61(2):219-35.
20. Suarez JI, Tarr RW, Selman WR. Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354(4):387-96.
21. Dorhout Mees S, Rinkel GJ, Feigin VL, Algra A, van den Bergh WM, Vermeulen M, van Gijn J. Calcium antagonists for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Cochrane Libr. 2007. Issue 3. Art. No:CD000277. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000277.pub3.
22. Macdonald RL, Higashida RT, Keller E, Mayer SA, Molyneux A, Raabe A, Vajkoczy P, Wanke I, Bach D, Frey A, et al. Clazosentan, an endothelin receptor antagonist, in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage undergoing surgical clipping: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (CONSCIOUS-2). Lancet Neurology. 2011; 10(7):618-25.
23. Macdonald RL, Higashida RT, Keller E, Mayer SA, Molyneux A, Raabe A, Vajkoczy P, Wanke I, Bach D, Frey A, et al. Randomized trial of clazosentan in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing endovascular coiling. Stroke. 2012; 43(6):1463-9.
24. Dorhout Mees SM, Algra A, Vandertop WP, van Kooten F, Kuijsten HA, Boiten J, van Oostenbrugge RJ, Salman RA-S, Lavados PM, Rinkel GJ, et al. Magnesium for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (MASH-2): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2012; 380(9836):44-9.
25. Suarez JI, Martin RH, Calvillo E, Dillon C, Bershad EM, MacDonald RL, Wong J, Harbaugh R. The Albumin in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (ALISAH) multicenter pilot clinical trial safety and neurologic outcomes. Stroke. 2012; 43(3):683-90.
26. Suarez JI, Shannon L, Zaidat OO, Suri MF, Singh G, Lynch G, Selman WR. Effect of human albumin administration on clinical outcome and hospital cost in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg. 2004; 100(4):585-90.
27. Hill MD, Martin RH, Palesch YY, Tamariz D, Waldman BD, Ryckborst KJ, Moy CS, Barsan WG, Ginsberg MD. The Albumin in Acute Stroke Part 1 trial: an exploratory efficacy analysis. Stroke. 2011; 42(6):1621-5.
28. Ginsberg MD, Palesch YY, Hill MD, Martin RH, Moy CS, Barsan WG, Waldman BD, Tamariz D, Ryckborst KJ, et al. High-dose albumin treatment for acute ischaemic stroke (ALIAS) Part 2: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurology. 2013; 12(11):1049-1058.
29. Hill MD, Martin RH, Palesch YY, Moy CS, Tamariz D, Ryckborst KJ, Jones EB, Weisman D, Pettigrew C, Ginsberg MD. Albumin administration in acute ischemic stroke: safety analysis of the ALIAS Part 2 Multicenter Trial. PloS ONE. 2015; 10(9):0131390.
30. Ellerbe C. What information will a statistician need to help me with a sample size calculation?Stroke. 2015; 46(7):159-61.
31. Dunnett CW. A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J Am Stat Assoc. 1955; 50(272):1096-121.
32. Wason J, Trippa L. A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi-stage designs for multi-arm clinical trials. Stat Med. 2014; 33(13):2206-21.
33. Bauer P, Koenig F, Brannath W, Posch M. Selection and bias-two hostile brothers. Stat Med. 2010; 29(1):1-13.
34. Liu Q, Proschan MA, Pledger GW. A unified theory of two-stage adaptive designs. J Am Stat Assoc. 2012; 97(460):1034-41.
35. Palesch YY. Some common misperceptions about P values. Stroke. 2014; 45(12):244-6.
36. Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA. The ASA's statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. Am Stat. 2016; 70(2):129-33.