Book contents
- Introduction to Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Introduction to Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Copyright page
- Content
- Preface
- About the Authors
- Part I Introduction and History of Clinical Trial Research
- Part II Basic Ingredients for Adaptive Trial Designs and Common Types
- Chapter 3 Characteristics and Principles of Adaptive Trial Designs
- Chapter 4 Common Types of Adaptive Trial Designs
- Chapter 5 Clinical Trial Simulations
- Part III Basic Ingredients for Master Protocols
- Part IV Case Studies of Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Part V A Practical Guide to Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Index
- References
Chapter 4 - Common Types of Adaptive Trial Designs
from Part II - Basic Ingredients for Adaptive Trial Designs and Common Types
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 March 2023
Book contents
- Introduction to Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Introduction to Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Copyright page
- Content
- Preface
- About the Authors
- Part I Introduction and History of Clinical Trial Research
- Part II Basic Ingredients for Adaptive Trial Designs and Common Types
- Chapter 3 Characteristics and Principles of Adaptive Trial Designs
- Chapter 4 Common Types of Adaptive Trial Designs
- Chapter 5 Clinical Trial Simulations
- Part III Basic Ingredients for Master Protocols
- Part IV Case Studies of Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Part V A Practical Guide to Adaptive Trial Designs and Master Protocols
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter discusses the common types of adaptive trial designs and their motivations and challenges. The common types covered in this chapter include: sequential designs, sample size re-assessment, adaptive randomisation, minimisation, response adaptive randomisation, enrichment design, and seamless design. Sequential designs that use interim analyses to allow for early stopping are the most common type of adaptive trial design. Sequential designs are often used with other types of adaptive trial designs. Other common types of adaptive trial designs include sample size re-assessment that uses blinded or unblinded data for re-estimation of sample size during the trial; response adaptive randomisation that preferentially increases allocation ratio in favour of treatment arm based on interim trial data; adaptive enrichment design that allows for modification of patient eligibility criteria; and seamless design that combines two phases of clinical trial research into one trial. Adaptive trial designs offer more flexibility in comparison to conventional fixed trial designs, but this comes with complexities that usually require more thorough and thoughtful planning in the design stage. Trade-offs for different design options should be carefully considered.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Dimairo, M, Pallmann, P, Wason, J, et al. The Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design. BMJ. 2020;369 :m115.Google Scholar
Dimairo, M, Pallmann, P, Wason, J, et al. The Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design. Trials. 2020;21(1):528.Google Scholar
Thorlund, K, Haggstrom, J, Park, JJ, Mills, EJ. Key design considerations for adaptive clinical trials: a primer for clinicians. BMJ. 2018;360:k698.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Park, JJ, Thorlund, K, Mills, EJ. Critical concepts in adaptive clinical trials. Clin Epidemiol. 2018;10:343–51.Google Scholar
Bhatt, DL, Mehta, C. Adaptive designs for clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(1):65–74.Google Scholar
Pocock, SJ. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika. 1977;64(2):191–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, P, Bretz, F, Dragalin, V, Konig, F, Wassmer, G. Twenty-five years of confirmatory adaptive designs: opportunities and pitfalls. Stat Med. 2016;35(3):325–47.Google Scholar
Jennison, C, Turnbull, BW. Group Sequential Methods with Applications to Clinical Trials. Chapman and Hall/CRC; 1999.Google Scholar
Freidlin, B, Korn, EL. A comment on futility monitoring. Control Clin Trials. 2002;23(4):355–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saville, BR, Connor, JT, Ayers, GD, Alvarez, J. The utility of Bayesian predictive probabilities for interim monitoring of clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2014;11(4):485–93.Google Scholar
Harari, O, Hsu, G, Dron, L, et al. Utilizing Bayesian predictive power in clinical trial design. Pharm Stat. 2020.Google Scholar
DeMets, DL, Pocock, SJ, Julian, DG. The agonising negative trend in monitoring of clinical trials. Lancet. 1999;354(9194):1983–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ioannidis, JP, Evans, SJ, Gotzsche, PC, et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(10):781–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armitage, P. Sequential medical trials: some comments on FJ Anscombe’s paper. JASA. 1963;58(302):384–7.Google Scholar
Fleming, TR, Harrington, DP, O’Brien, PC. Designs for group sequential tests. Control Clin Trials. 1984;5(4):348–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pallmann, P, Bedding, AW, Choodari-Oskooei, B, et al. Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them. BMC Med. 2018;16(1):29.Google Scholar
Kunzmann, K, Grayling, MJ, Lee, KM, et al. Conditional power and friends: the why and how of (un) planned, unblinded sample size recalculations in confirmatory trials. Stat Med. 2022;41(5):877–90.Google Scholar
Greenland, S, Senn, SJ, Rothman, KJ, et al. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. Eur J Epidemiol. 2016;31(4):337–50.Google Scholar
Gordon Lan, K, Reboussin, DM, DeMets, DL. Information and information fractions for design and sequential monitoring of clinical trials. Commun Stat. 1994;23(2):403–20.Google Scholar
O’Brien, PC, Fleming, TR. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics. 1979;35(3):549–56.Google ScholarPubMed
Haybittle, J. Repeated assessment of results in clinical trials of cancer treatment. Brit J Radiol. 1971;44(526):793–7.Google Scholar
Peto, R, Pike, M, Armitage, P, et al. Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. I. Introduction and design. BJC. 1976;34(6):585–612.Google Scholar
DeMets, DL, Lan, KG. Interim analysis: the alpha spending function approach. Stat Med. 1994;13(13‐14):1341–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meurer, WJ, Tolles, J. Interim analyses during group sequential clinical trials. JAMA. 2021;326(15):1524–5.Google Scholar
Lan, GK, DeMets, DL. Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika. 1983;70(3):659–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, K, DeMets, DL. Design and analysis of group sequential tests based on the type I error spending rate function. Biometrika. 1987;74(1):149–54.Google Scholar
Davis, BR, Hardy, RJ. Data monitoring in clinical trials: the case for stochastic curtailment. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47(9):1033–42.Google Scholar
Lakens, D, Pahlke, F, Wassmer, G. Group sequential designs: a tutorial. PsyArXiv Preprints. 2021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, PJ, Łatuszyński, K, Pereyra, M, Robert, CP. Bayesian computation: a summary of the current state, and samples backwards and forwards. Stat Comput. 2015;25(4):835–62.Google Scholar
Spiegelhalter, DJ, Freedman, LS, Blackburn, PR. Monitoring clinical trials: conditional or predictive power? Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(1):8–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Park, JW, Liu, MC, Yee, D, et al. Adaptive randomization of neratinib in early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(1):11–22.Google Scholar
Rugo, HS, Olopade, OI, DeMichele, A, et al. Adaptive randomization of veliparib-carboplatin treatment in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(1):23–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Viele, K, McGlothlin, A, Broglio, K. Interpretation of clinical trials that stopped early. JAMA. 2016;315(15):1646–7.Google Scholar
Goodman, SN. Stopping at Nothing? Some Dilemmas of Data Monitoring in Clinical Trials, pp. 882–7. American College of Physicians; 2007.Google Scholar
Bauer, P, Koenig, F. The reassessment of trial perspectives from interim data – a critical view. Stat Med. 2006;25(1):23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posch, M, Klinglmueller, F, Konig, F, Miller, F. Estimation after blinded sample size reassessment. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27(6):1830–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brannath, W, Mehta, CR, Posch, M. Exact confidence bounds following adaptive group sequential tests. Biometrics. 2009;65(2):539–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kieser, M, Friede, T. Simple procedures for blinded sample size adjustment that do not affect the type I error rate. Stat Med. 2003;22(23):3571–81.Google Scholar
Lin, J, Lin L-A, , Sankoh, S. A general overview of adaptive randomization design for clinical trials. J Biom Biostat. 2016;7(2):294.Google Scholar
Lin, Y, Zhu, M, Su, Z. The pursuit of balance: an overview of covariate-adaptive randomization techniques in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015;45(Pt A):21–5.Google Scholar
Atkinson, AC, Biswas, A. Randomised Response-Adaptive Designs in Clinical Trials. CRC Press; 2013.Google Scholar
Taves, DR. Minimization: a new method of assigning patients to treatment and control groups. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1974;15(5):443–53.Google Scholar
Pocock, SJ, Simon, R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics. 1975;31(1):103–15.Google Scholar
Zajicek, J, Ball, S, Wright, D, et al. Effect of dronabinol on progression in progressive multiple sclerosis (CUPID): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2013;12(9):857–65.Google Scholar
Treasure, T, MacRae, KD. Minimisation: the platinum standard for trials? Randomisation doesn’t guarantee similarity of groups; minimisation does.BMJ. 1998;317(7155):362–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenberger, WF, Lachin, JM. Randomization in Clinical Trials: Theory and Practice. Wiley & Sons; 2015.Google Scholar
Saghaei, M. An overview of randomization and minimization programs for randomized clinical trials. J Med Signals Sens. 2011;1(1):55–61.Google Scholar
Angus, DC. Optimizing the trade-off between learning and doing in a pandemic. JAMA. 2020;323(19):1895–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Creel, AH, Losina, E, Mandl, LA, et al. An assessment of willingness to participate in a randomized trial of arthroscopic knee surgery in patients with osteoarthritis. Contemp Clin Trials. 2005;26(2):169–78.Google Scholar
Proschan, M, Evans, S. Resist the temptation of response-adaptive randomization. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(11):3002–4.Google Scholar
Viele, K, Broglio, K, McGlothlin, A, Saville, BR. Comparison of methods for control allocation in multiple arm studies using response adaptive randomization. Clin Trials. 2020;17(1):52–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thall, P, Fox, P, Wathen, J. Statistical controversies in clinical research: scientific and ethical problems with adaptive randomization in comparative clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(8):1621–8.Google Scholar
Wathen, JK, Thall, PF. A simulation study of outcome adaptive randomization in multi-arm clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2017;14(5):432–40.Google Scholar
London, AJ. Learning health systems, clinical equipoise and the ethics of response adaptive randomisation. J Med Ethics. 2018;44(6):409–15.Google Scholar
Meurer, WJ, Lewis, RJ, Berry, DA. Adaptive clinical trials: a partial remedy for the therapeutic misconception? JAMA. 2012;307(22):2377–8.Google Scholar
Tehranisa, JS, Meurer, WJ. Can response-adaptive randomization increase participation in acute stroke trials? Stroke. 2014;45(7):2131–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, WR. On the likelihood that one unknown probability exceeds another in view of the evidence of two samples. Biometrika. 1933;25(3-4):285–94.Google Scholar
Juszczak, E, Altman, DG, Hopewell, S, Schulz, K. Reporting of multi-arm parallel-group randomized trials: extension of the consort 2010 statement. JAMA. 2019;321(16):1610–20.Google Scholar
Koenig, F, Brannath, W, Bretz, F, Posch, M. Adaptive Dunnett tests for treatment selection. Stat Med. 2008;27(10):1612–25.Google Scholar
Zhao, W, Durkalski, V. Managing competing demands in the implementation of response‐adaptive randomization in a large multicenter phase III acute stroke trial. Stat Med 2014;33(23):4043–52.Google Scholar
Treweek, S, Pitkethly, M, Cook, J, et al. Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;2:MR000013.Google Scholar
Simon, N, Simon, R. Adaptive enrichment designs for clinical trials. Biostatistics. 2013;14(4):613–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Antoniou, M, Jorgensen, AL, Kolamunnage-Dona, R. Biomarker-guided adaptive trial designs in phase II and phase III: a methodological review. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0149803.Google Scholar
Antoniou, M, Kolamunnage-Dona, R, Jorgensen, AL. Biomarker-guided non-adaptive trial designs in phase II and phase III: a methodological review. J Pers Med. 2017;7(1).Google Scholar
Mehta, CR, Gao, P. Population enrichment designs: case study of a large multinational trial. J Biopharm Stat. 2011;21(4):831–45.Google Scholar
Nogueira, RG, Jadhav, AP, Haussen, DC, et al. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(1):11–21.Google Scholar
Antoniou, M, Kolamunnage-Dona, R, Wason, J, et al. Biomarker-guided trials: Challenges in practice. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2019;16:100493.Google Scholar
Grudzinskas, C. Design of clinical development programs. In Atkinson, AJ, Abernethy, DR, Daniels, CE, Dedrick, RL, Markey, SP, editors. Principles of Clinical Pharmacology, 2nd ed., pp. 501–17. Academic Press; 2007.Google Scholar
Cuffe, RL, Lawrence, D, Stone, A, Vandemeulebroecke, M. When is a seamless study desirable? Case studies from different pharmaceutical sponsors. Pharmaceutical statistics. 2014;13(4):229–37.Google Scholar
Hobbs, BP, Barata, PC, Kanjanapan, Y, et al. Seamless designs: current practice and considerations for early-phase drug development in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019;111(2):118–28.Google Scholar
Sydes, MR, Parmar, MK, Mason, MD, et al. Flexible trial design in practice – stopping arms for lack-of-benefit and adding research arms mid-trial in STAMPEDE: a multi-arm multi-stage randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2012;13:168.Google Scholar
Barker, AD, Sigman, CC, Kelloff, GJ, et al. I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;86(1):97–100.Google Scholar