Planning and Analyzing Adaptive Group Sequential Survival Trials

The use of adaptive methods has experienced increasing interest in the current literature on group sequential designs. Group sequential analysis in survival trials usually apply the error spending function approach due to the unpredictable amount of information available in an interim analysis. An alternative way is to apply adaptive methods where additionally the maximum amount of information and other designing parameters can be changed based on the information available at the interim stage. In this paper, it is shown how the inverse normal method can be used within a survival design using the log-rank test for comparing two survival functions. This method allows for many kinds of design modifications. In case of no modifications, the inverse normal method coincides with the commonly used analysis strategy. It is straightforward to specify effect estimates. Confidence intervals for the hazard ratio that can be calculated at each stage of the trial and intervals that can only be computed by the end of the trial are proposed. The latter also enables the calculation of median unbiased estimates. Overall p-values can be defined analogously. Properties of the analyses techniques are investigated and compared with alternative approaches. It is shown that the proposed analysis technique might help to rescue an underpowered study and opens the way to other types of changes in design. The proposed technique is implemented in the software ADDPLAN Adaptive Design, Plans and Analyses (http://www.addplan.com).

[1]  Guido Knapp,et al.  A New Class of Completely Self-Designing Clinical Trials† , 2003 .

[2]  K Kim,et al.  Study duration for clinical trials with survival response and early stopping rule. , 1990, Biometrics.

[3]  G. Wassmer Data-Driven Analysis Strategies for Proportion Studies in Adaptive Group Sequential Test Designs , 2003, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[4]  Anastasios A. Tsiatis,et al.  The asymptotic joint distribution of the efficient scores test for the proportional hazards model calculated over time , 1981 .

[5]  F. Hsieh Comparing sample size formulae for trials with unbalanced allocation using the logrank test. , 1992, Statistics in medicine.

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

[7]  Theo Stijnen,et al.  Interim analysis on survival data: its potential bias and how to repair it , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  Sue-Jane Wang,et al.  Modification of Sample Size in Group Sequential Clinical Trials , 1999, Biometrics.

[9]  L Fisher,et al.  Statistical Inference for Self‐Designing Clinical Trials with a One‐Sided Hypothesis , 1999, Biometrics.

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

[11]  L. Freedman Tables of the number of patients required in clinical trials using the logrank test. , 1982, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  Jianwen Cai,et al.  Sample Size Reestimation for Clinical Trials With Censored Survival Data , 2003 .

[13]  R. Madsen,et al.  P values for tests using a repeated significance test design , 1982 .

[14]  B. Turnbull,et al.  Group Sequential Methods with Applications to Clinical Trials , 1999 .

[15]  W. Brannath,et al.  Recursive Combination Tests , 2002 .

[16]  Martin Posch,et al.  Conditional Rejection Probabilities of Student's t‐test and Design Adaptations , 2004 .

[17]  L D Fisher,et al.  Self-designing clinical trials. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  P. Bauer,et al.  Modification of the sample size and the schedule of interim analyses in survival trials based on data inspections by H. Schäfer and H.‐H. Müller, Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20: 3741–3751 , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[19]  H. Schäfer,et al.  Modification of the sample size and the schedule of interim analyses in survival trials based on data inspections , 2001, Statistics in medicine.

[20]  A A Tsiatis,et al.  Exact confidence intervals following a group sequential test. , 1984, Biometrics.

[21]  M. Olschewski,et al.  Sequential Analysis of Survival Times in Clinical Trials , 1986 .

[22]  A. Tsiatis,et al.  Approximately optimal one-parameter boundaries for group sequential trials. , 1987, Biometrics.

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

[24]  Anastasios A. Tsiatis,et al.  Repeated Significance Testing for a General Class of Statistics Used in Censored Survival Analysis , 1982 .

[25]  G. Hommel Adaptive Modifications of Hypotheses After an Interim Analysis , 2001 .

[26]  John Lawrence,et al.  STRATEGIES FOR CHANGING THE TEST STATISTIC DURING A CLINICAL TRIAL , 2002, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[27]  P. Bauer,et al.  Adaptive Two Stage Designs and the Conditional Error Function , 1999 .

[28]  John Whitehead,et al.  Sequential forms of the log rank and modified Wilcoxon tests for censored data , 1979 .

[29]  Christopher Jennison,et al.  Interim analyses: the repeated confidence interval approach , 1989 .

[30]  M. Proschan,et al.  Designed extension of studies based on conditional power. , 1995 .

[31]  Gernot Wassmer,et al.  Flexible Interim Analyses in Clinical Trials Using Multistage Adaptive Test Designs , 2001 .

[32]  Christopher Jennison,et al.  Mid‐course sample size modification in clinical trials based on the observed treatment effect , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[33]  Thomas Sellke,et al.  Sequential analysis of the proportional hazards model , 1983 .

[34]  H. Schäfer,et al.  Adaptive Group Sequential Designs for Clinical Trials: Combining the Advantages of Adaptive and of Classical Group Sequential Approaches , 2001, Biometrics.