Treatment allocation in clinical trials

Transfusion ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 47 (12) ◽  
pp. 2187-2188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn E. Webert
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elja Arjas ◽  
Dario Gasbarra

Abstract Background: Adaptive designs offer added flexibility in the execution of clinical trials, including the possibilities of allocating more patients to the treatments that turned out more successful, and early stopping due to either declared success or futility. Commonly applied adaptive designs, such as group sequential methods, are based on the frequentist paradigm and on ideas from statistical significance testing. Interim checks during the trial will have the effect of inflating the Type 1 error rate, or, if this rate is controlled and kept fixed, lowering the power. Results: The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate the usefulness of the Bayesian approach in the design and in the actual running of randomized clinical trials during Phase II and III. This approach is based on comparing the performance of the different treatment arm in terms of the respective joint posterior probabilities evaluated sequentially from the accruing outcome data, and then taking a control action if such posterior probabilities fall below a pre-specified critical threshold value. Two types of actions are considered: treatment allocation, putting on hold at least temporarily further accrual of patients to a treatment arm (Rule 1), and treatment selection, removing an arm from the trial permanently (Rule 2). The main development in the paper is in terms of binary outcomes, but extensions for handling time-to-event data, including data from vaccine trials, are also discussed. The performance of the proposed methodology is tested in extensive simulation experiments, with numerical results and graphical illustrations documented in a Supplement to the main text. As a companion to this paper, an implementation of the methods is provided in the form of a freely available R package. Conclusion: The proposed methods for trial design provide an attractive alternative to their frequentist counterparts.


Biometrics ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin B. Begg ◽  
Boris Iglewicz

PLoS ONE ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e110395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asha C. Bowen ◽  
Kara Burns ◽  
Steven Y. C. Tong ◽  
Ross M. Andrews ◽  
Robyn Liddle ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanqing Hu ◽  
Feifang Hu

In many clinical trials, it is important to balance treatment allocation over covariates. Although a great many papers have been published on balancing over discrete covariates, the procedures for continuous covariates have been less well studied. Traditionally, a continuous covariate usually needs to be transformed to a discrete one by splitting its range into several categories. Such practice may lead to loss of information and is susceptible to misspecification of covariate distribution. The more recent papers seek to define an imbalance measure that preserves the nature of continuous covariates and set the allocation rule in order to minimize that measure. We propose a new design, which defines the imbalance measure by the maximum assignment difference when all possible divisions of the covariate range are considered. This measure depends only on ranks of the covariate values and is therefore free of covariate distribution. In addition, we developed an efficient algorithm to implement the new procedure. By simulation studies we show that the new procedure is able to keep good balance properties in comparison with other popular designs.


2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 1078-1092 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy S Nowacki ◽  
Wenle Zhao ◽  
Yuko Y Palesch

Response-adaptive randomization (RAR) offers clinical investigators benefit by modifying the treatment allocation probabilities to optimize the ethical, operational, or statistical performance of the trial. Delayed primary outcomes and their effect on RAR have been studied in the literature; however, the incorporation of surrogate outcomes has not been fully addressed. We explore the benefits and limitations of surrogate outcome utilization in RAR in the context of acute stroke clinical trials. We propose a novel surrogate-primary (S-P) replacement algorithm where a patient’s surrogate outcome is used in the RAR algorithm only until their primary outcome becomes available to replace it. Computer simulations investigate the effect of both the delay in obtaining the primary outcome and the underlying surrogate and primary outcome distributional discrepancies on complete randomization, standard RAR and the S-P replacement algorithm methods. Results show that when the primary outcome is delayed, the S-P replacement algorithm reduces the variability of the treatment allocation probabilities and achieves stabilization sooner. Additionally, the S-P replacement algorithm benefit proved to be robust in that it preserved power and reduced the expected number of failures across a variety of scenarios.


Biometrika ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. J. FLEHINGER ◽  
T. A. LOUIS

2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 637-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Florimond Borm ◽  
Elizabeth H. Hoogendoorn ◽  
Martin den Heijer ◽  
Gerhard A. Zielhuis

1993 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-149
Author(s):  
David Faraggi ◽  
Benjamin Reiser

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document