Sample size planning for phase II trials based on success probabilities for phase III

In recent years, high failure rates in phase III trials were observed. One of the main reasons is overoptimistic assumptions for the planning of phase III resulting from limited phase II information and/or unawareness of realistic success probabilities. We present an approach for planning a phase II trial in a time-to-event setting that considers the whole phase II/III clinical development programme. We derive stopping boundaries after phase II that minimise the number of events under side conditions for the conditional probabilities of correct go/no-go decision after phase II as well as the conditional success probabilities for phase III. In addition, we give general recommendations for the choice of phase II sample size. Our simulations show that unconditional probabilities of go/no-go decision as well as the unconditional success probabilities for phase III are influenced by the number of events observed in phase II. However, choosing more than 150 events in phase II seems not necessary as the impact on these probabilities then becomes quite small. We recommend considering aspects like the number of compounds in phase II and the resources available when determining the sample size. The lower the number of compounds and the lower the resources are for phase III, the higher the investment for phase II should be.

[1]  Charles C. Persinger,et al.  How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry's grand challenge , 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[2]  Michael Branson,et al.  A proof of concept phase II non‐inferiority criterion , 2011, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  Christy Chuang-Stein,et al.  A Revisit of Sample Size Decisions in Confirmatory Trials , 2010 .

[4]  Jeremy E Oakley,et al.  Assurance calculations for planning clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes , 2013, Statistics in medicine.

[5]  Peter F Thall,et al.  A review of phase 2–3 clinical trial designs , 2008, Lifetime data analysis.

[6]  C Chuang-Stein,et al.  Discounting phase 2 results when planning phase 3 clinical trials , 2012, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[7]  M. Fay,et al.  Accounting for Variability in Sample Size Estimation with Applications to Nonadherence and Estimation of Variance and Effect Size , 2007, Biometrics.

[8]  Nigel Stallard,et al.  Optimal sample sizes for phase II clinical trials and pilot studies , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  Kevin J Carroll,et al.  Decision Making from Phase II to Phase III and the Probability of Success: Reassured by “Assurance”? , 2013, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[10]  Valeria Sambucini,et al.  A Bayesian predictive two‐stage design for phase II clinical trials , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[11]  Kaihong Jiang,et al.  Optimal Sample Sizes and Go/No-Go Decisions for Phase II/III Development Programs Based on Probability of Success , 2011 .

[12]  Robert A. Beckman,et al.  Optimal Cost-Effective Go-No Go Decisions in Late-Stage Oncology Drug Development , 2009 .

[13]  D. Schoenfeld.  The asymptotic properties of nonparametric tests for comparing survival distributions , 1981 .

[14]  David J. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Bayesian Approaches to Randomized Trials , 1994, Bayesian Biostatistics.

[15]  D. Martini.  Adapting by calibration the sample size of a phase III trial on the basis of phase II data. , 2011, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[16]  G. Pond,et al.  Assumptions of expected benefits in randomized phase III trials evaluating systemic treatments for cancer. , 2012, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[17]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  A predictive approach to selecting the size of a clinical trial, based on subjective clinical opinion. , 1986, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  Fei Wang,et al.  A simulation-based approach to Bayesian sample size determination for performance under a given model and for separating models , 2002 .

[19]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  Assurance in clinical trial design , 2005 .