Adaptive enrichment trials: What are the benefits?

When planning a Phase III clinical trial, suppose a certain subset of patients is expected to respond particularly well to the new treatment. Adaptive enrichment designs make use of interim data in selecting the target population for the remainder of the trial, either continuing with the full population or restricting recruitment to the subset of patients. We define a multiple testing procedure that maintains strong control of the familywise error rate, while allowing for the adaptive sampling procedure. We derive the Bayes optimal rule for deciding whether or not to restrict recruitment to the subset after the interim analysis and present an efficient algorithm to facilitate simulation-based optimisation, enabling the construction of Bayes optimal rules in a wide variety of problem formulations. We compare adaptive enrichment designs with traditional nonadaptive designs in a broad range of examples and draw clear conclusions about the potential benefits of adaptive enrichment.

[1]  P. Bauer,et al.  Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. , 1994, Biometrics.

[2]  W. Lehmacher,et al.  Adaptive Sample Size Calculations in Group Sequential Trials , 1999, Biometrics.

[3]  K. Gabriel,et al.  On closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of variance , 1976 .

[4]  R. D'Agostino,et al.  Key multiplicity issues in clinical drug development , 2013, Statistics in medicine.

[5]  Martin Posch,et al.  Optimized adaptive enrichment designs , 2017, Statistical methods in medical research.

[6]  Frank Bretz,et al.  Confirmatory Seamless Phase II/III Clinical Trials with Hypotheses Selection at Interim: General Concepts , 2006, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[7]  Frank Bretz,et al.  Confirmatory Seamless Phase II/III Clinical Trials with Hypotheses Selection at Interim: Applications and Practical Considerations , 2006, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[8]  R. Simes,et al.  An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance , 1986 .

[9]  Chikuma Hamada,et al.  Utility-Based Interim Decision Rule Planning in Adaptive Population Selection Designs With Survival Endpoints , 2019, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research.

[10]  Heiko Götte,et al.  Improving Probabilities of Correct Interim Decision in Population Enrichment Designs , 2015, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[11]  Christopher Jennison,et al.  Adaptive Seamless Designs: Selection and Prospective Testing of Hypotheses , 2007, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[12]  Joachim Hartung A note on combining dependent tests of significance , 1998 .

[13]  S. Sarkar,et al.  The Simes Method for Multiple Hypothesis Testing with Positively Dependent Test Statistics , 1997 .

[14]  Frank Bretz,et al.  Confirmatory adaptive designs with Bayesian decision tools for a targeted therapy in oncology , 2009, Statistics in medicine.