Dataset Information

Efficiency perspectives on adaptive designs in stroke clinical trials.

ABSTRACT: An adaptive design allows the modifications of various features, such as sample size and treatment assignments, in a clinical study based on the analysis of interim data. The goal is to enhance statistical efficiency by maximizing relevant information obtained from the clinical data. The promise of efficiency, however, comes with a cost, per se, that is seldom made explicit in the literature. This article reviews some commonly used adaptive strategies in early-phase stroke trials and discusses their associated costs. Specifically, we illustrate the trade-offs in several clinical contexts, including dose-finding in the Neuroprotection with Statin Therapy for Acute Recovery Trial (NeuSTART), futility analyses and internal pilot in Phase 2 proof-of-concept trials, and sample size considerations in an imaging-based dose-selection trial. Through these illustrations, we demonstrate the potential tension between the perspectives of an individual investigator and that of the broader community of stakeholders. This understanding is critical to appreciate the limitations, as well as the full promise, of adaptive designs, so that investigators can deploy an appropriate statistical design--be it adaptive or not--in a clinical study.

SUBMITTER: Cheung K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3183258 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficiency perspectives on adaptive designs in stroke clinical trials.

Cheung Ken K Kaufmann Petra P

Stroke 20110901 10

An adaptive design allows the modifications of various features, such as sample size and treatment assignments, in a clinical study based on the analysis of interim data. The goal is to enhance statistical efficiency by maximizing relevant information obtained from the clinical data. The promise of efficiency, however, comes with a cost, per se, that is seldom made explicit in the literature. This article reviews some commonly used adaptive strategies in early-phase stroke trials and discusses t ...[more]

PMID: 21885845

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdaptive clinical trials (ACTs) represent an emerging approach to trial design where accumulating data are used to make decisions about future conduct. Adaptations can include comparisons of multiple dose tiers, response-adaptive randomization, sample size re-estimation, and efficacy/futility stopping rules. The objective of this scoping review is to assess stakeholder attitudes, perspectives, and understanding of adaptive trials.MethodsWe conducted a review of articles examining stakeholders encompassing the broad medical trial community's perspectives of adaptive designs (ADs). A computerized search was conducted of four electronic databases with relevant search terms. Following screening of articles, the primary findings of each included article were coded for study design, population studied, purpose, and primary implications.ResultsOur team retrieved 167 peer-reviewed titles in total from the database search and 5 additional titles through searching web-based search engines for gray literature. Of those 172 titles, 152 were non-duplicate citations. Of these, 119 were not given full-text reviews, as their titles and abstracts indicated that they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Thirty-three articles were carefully examined for relevance, and of those, 18 were chosen to be part of the analysis; the other 15 were excluded, as they were not relevant upon closer inspection. Perceived advantages to ADs included limiting ineffective treatments and efficiency in answering the research question; -perceived barriers included insufficient sample size for secondary outcomes, challenges of consent, potential for bias, risk of type 1 error, cost and time to adaptively design trials, unclear rationales for using Ads, and, most importantly, a lack of education regarding ADs among stakeholders within the clinical trial community. Perceptions among different types of stakeholders varied from sector to sector, with patient perspectives being noticeably absent from the literature.ConclusionThere are diverse perceptions regarding ADs among stakeholders. Further training, guidelines, and toolkits on the proper use of ADs are needed at all levels to overcome many of these perceived barriers. While education for principal investigators is important, it is also crucial to educate other groups in the community, such as patients, as well as clinicians and staff involved in their daily implementation.

Project description:BackgroundAdaptive clinical trials are growing in popularity as they are more flexible, efficient and ethical than traditional fixed designs. However, notwithstanding their increased use in assessing treatments for COVID-19, their use in critical care trials remains limited. A better understanding of the relative benefits of various adaptive designs may increase their use and interpretation.MethodsUsing two large critical care trials (ADRENAL.Clinicaltrialsgov number, NCT01448109. Updated 12-12-2017; NICE-SUGAR.Clinicaltrialsgov number, NCT00220987. Updated 01-29-2009), we assessed the performance of three frequentist and two bayesian adaptive approaches. We retrospectively re-analysed the trials with one, two, four, and nine equally spaced interims. Using the original hypotheses, we conducted 10,000 simulations to derive error rates, probabilities of making an early correct and incorrect decision, expected sample size and treatment effect estimates under the null scenario (no treatment effect) and alternative scenario (a positive treatment effect). We used a logistic regression model with 90-day mortality as the outcome and the treatment arm as the covariate. The null hypothesis was tested using a two-sided significance level (α) at 0.05.ResultsAcross all approaches, increasing the number of interims led to a decreased expected sample size. Under the null scenario, group sequential approaches provided good control of the type-I error rate; however, the type I error rate inflation was an issue for the Bayesian approaches. The Bayesian Predictive Probability and O'Brien-Fleming approaches showed the highest probability of correctly stopping the trials (around 95%). Under the alternative scenario, the Bayesian approaches showed the highest overall probability of correctly stopping the ADRENAL trial for efficacy (around 91%), whereas the Haybittle-Peto approach achieved the greatest power for the NICE-SUGAR trial. Treatment effect estimates became increasingly underestimated as the number of interims increased.ConclusionsThis study confirms the right adaptive design can reach the same conclusion as a fixed design with a much-reduced sample size. The efficiency gain associated with an increased number of interims is highly relevant to late-phase critical care trials with large sample sizes and short follow-up times. Systematically exploring adaptive methods at the trial design stage will aid the choice of the most appropriate method.

Dataset Information

Efficiency perspectives on adaptive designs in stroke clinical trials.

Publications

Efficiency perspectives on adaptive designs in stroke clinical trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets