scholarly journals Adaptive enrichment designs for clinical trials

Biostatistics ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 613-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Simon ◽  
R. Simon
2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiwei Zhang ◽  
Ruizhe Chen ◽  
Guoxing Soon ◽  
Hui Zhang

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 393-411
Author(s):  
Peter F. Thall

Adaptive enrichment designs for clinical trials may include rules that use interim data to identify treatment-sensitive patient subgroups, select or compare treatments, or change entry criteria. A common setting is a trial to compare a new biologically targeted agent to standard therapy. An enrichment design's structure depends on its goals, how it accounts for patient heterogeneity and treatment effects, and practical constraints. This article first covers basic concepts, including treatment-biomarker interaction, precision medicine, selection bias, and sequentially adaptive decision making, and briefly describes some different types of enrichment. Numerical illustrations are provided for qualitatively different cases involving treatment-biomarker interactions. Reviews are given of adaptive signature designs; a Bayesian design that uses a random partition to identify treatment-sensitive biomarker subgroups and assign treatments; and designs that enrich superior treatment sample sizes overall or within subgroups, make subgroup-specific decisions, or include outcome-adaptive randomization.


Stroke ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 2021-2025 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Rosenblum ◽  
Daniel F. Hanley

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah Simon

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 613-624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tze Leung Lai ◽  
Philip W. Lavori ◽  
Ka Wai Tsang

Biostatistics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Arni Steingrimsson ◽  
Joshua Betz ◽  
Tianchen Qian ◽  
Michael Rosenblum

Summary We consider the problem of designing a confirmatory randomized trial for comparing two treatments versus a common control in two disjoint subpopulations. The subpopulations could be defined in terms of a biomarker or disease severity measured at baseline. The goal is to determine which treatments benefit which subpopulations. We develop a new class of adaptive enrichment designs tailored to solving this problem. Adaptive enrichment designs involve a preplanned rule for modifying enrollment based on accruing data in an ongoing trial. At the interim analysis after each stage, for each subpopulation, the preplanned rule may decide to stop enrollment or to stop randomizing participants to one or more study arms. The motivation for this adaptive feature is that interim data may indicate that a subpopulation, such as those with lower disease severity at baseline, is unlikely to benefit from a particular treatment while uncertainty remains for the other treatment and/or subpopulation. We optimize these adaptive designs to have the minimum expected sample size under power and Type I error constraints. We compare the performance of the optimized adaptive design versus an optimized nonadaptive (single stage) design. Our approach is demonstrated in simulation studies that mimic features of a completed trial of a medical device for treating heart failure. The optimized adaptive design has $25\%$ smaller expected sample size compared to the optimized nonadaptive design; however, the cost is that the optimized adaptive design has $8\%$ greater maximum sample size. Open-source software that implements the trial design optimization is provided, allowing users to investigate the tradeoffs in using the proposed adaptive versus standard designs.


Biostatistics ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 650-662 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Rosenblum ◽  
Tianchen Qian ◽  
Yu Du ◽  
Huitong Qiu ◽  
Aaron Fisher

Pain ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 139 (2) ◽  
pp. 479-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roland Staud ◽  
Donald D. Price

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document