Cox Regression Methods for Two‐Stage Randomization Designs

Two-stage randomization designs (TSRD) are becoming increasingly common in oncology and AIDS clinical trials as they make more efficient use of study participants to examine therapeutic regimens. In these designs patients are initially randomized to an induction treatment, followed by randomization to a maintenance treatment conditional on their induction response and consent to further study treatment. Broader acceptance of TSRDs in drug development may hinge on the ability to make appropriate intent-to-treat type inference within this design framework as to whether an experimental induction regimen is better than a standard induction regimen when maintenance treatment is fixed. Recently Lunceford, Davidian, and Tsiatis (2002, Biometrics 58, 48-57) introduced an inverse probability weighting based analytical framework for estimating survival distributions and mean restricted survival times, as well as for comparing treatment policies at landmarks in the TSRD setting. In practice Cox regression is widely used and in this article we extend the analytical framework of Lunceford et al. (2002) to derive a consistent estimator for the log hazard in the Cox model and a robust score test to compare treatment policies. Large sample properties of these methods are derived, illustrated via a simulation study, and applied to a TSRD clinical trial.

[1]  David A. Binder,et al.  Fitting Cox's proportional hazards models from survey data , 1992 .

[2]  P. Grambsch,et al.  Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model , 2000 .

[3]  P. Holland Statistics and Causal Inference , 1985 .

[4]  R. L. Prentice,et al.  A case-cohort design for epidemiologic cohort studies and disease prevention trials , 1986 .

[5]  Marie Davidian,et al.  Estimation of Survival Distributions of Treatment Policies in Two‐Stage Randomization Designs in Clinical Trials , 2002, Biometrics.

[6]  Z. Ying,et al.  Cox Regression with Incomplete Covariate Measurements , 1993 .

[7]  H. Senn,et al.  Combined-modality treatment of small-cell lung cancer: Randomized comparison of three induction chemotherapies followed by maintenance chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy to the chest , 1994 .

[8]  S. Gasparini,et al.  Small cell lung cancer (SCLC): a randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine plus etoposide (CAV-E) or teniposide (CAV-T) as induction treatment, followed in complete responders by alpha-interferon or no treatment, as maintenance therapy. , 1994, Anticancer research.

[9]  H. Sung,et al.  Selecting Therapeutic Strategies Based on Efficacy and Death in Multicourse Clinical Trials , 2002 .

[10]  D. Horvitz,et al.  A Generalization of Sampling Without Replacement from a Finite Universe , 1952 .

[11]  C Y Wang,et al.  Augmented Inverse Probability Weighted Estimator for Cox Missing Covariate Regression , 2001, Biometrics.

[12]  Randy D Gascoyne,et al.  Rituximab-CHOP versus CHOP alone or with maintenance rituximab in older patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  A. Tsiatis,et al.  Optimal Estimator for the Survival Distribution and Related Quantities for Treatment Policies in Two‐Stage Randomization Designs in Clinical Trials , 2004, Biometrics.

[14]  R. Gascoyne,et al.  Rituximab-CHOP Versus CHOP with or without Maintenance Rituximab in Patients 60 Years of Age or Older with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL): An Update. , 2004 .