An optimal two-stage phase II design utilizing complete and partial response information separately.

Phase II clinical trials in oncology are performed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of a new treatment regimen. A common measure of efficacy for these trials is the proportion of patients who obtain a response measured by tumor shrinkage. It is standard practice to classify this response into the following categories: (1) complete response (CR); (2) partial response (PR); (3) stable disease; and (4) progression of disease. Tumor response is then treated as a binary variable whereby patients who achieve either a CR or a PR are considered responders and all others nonresponders. A two-stage design that allows for early termination of the trial if the treatment shows little efficacy such as Gehan or Simon gives equal weight to a CR and a PR. However, a CR, defined as complete disappearance of the tumor, is more likely than a PR to signal an important antitumor effect and result in a survival advantage. We argue that CRs and PRs should be considered separately, and hence we propose a two-stage design with a multilevel endpoint (i.e., CR, PR, and nonresponders). This design is an extension of Simon's optimal two-stage design and is based on a trinomial model. For most scenarios the proposed design results in an improvement in expected sample size compared to Simon's optimal design. Design optimization was performed by a direct search based on enumerating exact trinomial probabilities. Sample size tables are provided for parameter sets commonly used in the oncologic setting. Software is available by contacting the authors.

[1]  E. Gehan,et al.  The determinatio of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. , 1961, Journal of chronic diseases.

[2]  T R Fleming,et al.  One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. , 1982, Biometrics.

[3]  J. Herson,et al.  Predictive probability early termination plans for phase II clinical trials. , 1979, Biometrics.

[4]  D. Sargent,et al.  A three-outcome design for phase II clinical trials. , 2001, Controlled clinical trials.

[5]  E. Eisenhauer,et al.  Multinomial phase II cancer trials incorporating response and early progression. , 1999, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[6]  P F Thall,et al.  New statistical strategy for monitoring safety and efficacy in single-arm clinical trials. , 1996, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  J. Bryant,et al.  Incorporating toxicity considerations into the design of two-stage phase II clinical trials. , 1995, Biometrics.

[8]  C. Begg,et al.  Phase III multicenter randomized trial of the Dartmouth regimen versus dacarbazine in patients with metastatic melanoma. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  R. Simon,et al.  Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. , 1989, Controlled clinical trials.

[10]  Terry M. Therneau,et al.  Optimal designs for a grouped sequential binomial trial , 1990 .

[11]  M R Conaway,et al.  Designs for phase II trials allowing for a trade-off between response and toxicity. , 1996, Biometrics.

[12]  D J Sargent,et al.  Sample size and design considerations for phase II clinical trials with correlated observations. , 1997, Controlled clinical trials.

[13]  P. Thall,et al.  Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single-arm clinical trials with multiple outcomes. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[14]  M R Conaway,et al.  Bivariate sequential designs for phase II trials. , 1995, Biometrics.

[15]  R. Fisher,et al.  High-dose recombinant interleukin 2 therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma: analysis of 270 patients treated between 1985 and 1993. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[16]  T T Chen,et al.  Optimal flexible designs in phase II clinical trials. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[17]  E. Eisenhauer,et al.  Application of a new multinomial phase II stopping rule using response and early progression. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  Richard Sylvester A bayesian approach to the design of phase II clinical trials. , 1988 .

[19]  T. Chen,et al.  Optimal two-stage designs for phase ii clinical trials with differentiation of complete and partial responses , 2000 .