Sequential designs for phase III clinical trials incorporating treatment selection

Most statistical methodology for phase III clinical trials focuses on the comparison of a single experimental treatment with a control. An increasing desire to reduce the time before regulatory approval of a new drug is sought has led to development of two-stage or sequential designs for trials that combine the definitive analysis associated with phase III with the treatment selection element of a phase II study. In this paper we consider a trial in which the most promising of a number of experimental treatments is selected at the first interim analysis. This considerably reduces the computational load associated with the construction of stopping boundaries compared to the approach proposed by Follman, Proschan and Geller (Biometrics 1994; 50: 325-336). The computational requirement does not exceed that for the sequential comparison of a single experimental treatment with a control. Existing methods are extended in two ways. First, the use of the efficient score as a test statistic makes the analysis of binary, normal or failure-time data, as well as adjustment for covariates or stratification straightforward. Second, the question of trial power is also considered, enabling the determination of sample size required to give specified power.

[1]  D. Wilkinson,et al.  Galantamine: a randomized, double‐blind, dose comparison in patients with Alzheimer's disease , 2001, International journal of geriatric psychiatry.

[2]  David L. DeMets,et al.  Design and analysis of group sequential tests based on the type I error spending rate function , 1987 .

[3]  Christopher Jennison,et al.  Numerical Computations for Group Sequential Tests , 1999 .

[4]  Richard Simon,et al.  Two-stage selection and testing designs for comparative clinical trials , 1988 .

[5]  P. Armitage,et al.  Repeated Significance Tests on Accumulating Data , 1969 .

[6]  D A Follmann,et al.  Monitoring pairwise comparisons in multi-armed clinical trials. , 1994, Biometrics.

[7]  Peter Armitage,et al.  16. The Design and Analysis of Sequential Clinical Trials , 1993 .

[8]  James M. Robins,et al.  Semiparametric Efficiency and its Implication on the Design and Analysis of Group-Sequential Studies , 1997 .

[9]  P F Thall,et al.  A two-stage design for choosing among several experimental treatments and a control in clinical trials. , 1989, Biometrics.

[10]  Susan Todd,et al.  Sequential Designs for Monitoring Two Endpoints in a Clinical Trial , 1999 .

[11]  Christopher Jennison,et al.  Group Sequential Analysis Incorporating Covariate Information , 1997 .

[12]  P. Tariot,et al.  A 5-month, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of galantamine in AD , 2000, Neurology.

[13]  K. K. Lan,et al.  Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials , 1983 .

[14]  N Stallard,et al.  Comparison of the spending function method and the Christmas tree correction for group sequential trials. , 1996, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[15]  A. Tamhane Design and Analysis of Experiments for Statistical Selection, Screening, and Multiple Comparisons , 1995 .

[16]  E. Paulson A Sequential Procedure for Selecting the Population with the Largest Mean from $k$ Normal Populations , 1964 .

[17]  Terry M. Therneau,et al.  Optimal two-stage screening designs for survival comparisons , 1990 .