Marschner Ian C
Asia Biometrics Center, Pfizer Australia, West Ryde, NSW, Australia.
Pharm Stat. 2007 Jan-Mar;6(1):23-33. doi: 10.1002/pst.240.
Clinical trials are often designed to compare several treatments with a common control arm in pairwise fashion. In this paper we study optimal designs for such studies, based on minimizing the total number of patients required to achieve a given level of power. A common approach when designing studies to compare several treatments with a control is to achieve the desired power for each individual pairwise treatment comparison. However, it is often more appropriate to characterize power in terms of the family of null hypotheses being tested, and to control the probability of rejecting all, or alternatively any, of these individual hypotheses. While all approaches lead to unbalanced designs with more patients allocated to the control arm, it is found that the optimal design and required number of patients can vary substantially depending on the chosen characterization of power. The methods make allowance for both continuous and binary outcomes and are illustrated with reference to two clinical trials, one involving multiple doses compared to placebo and the other involving combination therapy compared to mono-therapies. In one example a 55% reduction in sample size is achieved through an optimal design combined with the appropriate characterization of power.
临床试验通常设计为以两两比较的方式将几种治疗方法与一个共同的对照臂进行比较。在本文中,我们基于最小化达到给定检验效能水平所需的患者总数,研究此类研究的最优设计。在设计将几种治疗方法与对照进行比较的研究时,一种常见的方法是针对每个单独的两两治疗比较实现所需的检验效能。然而,通常更合适的做法是根据所检验的原假设族来描述检验效能,并控制拒绝所有这些单独假设或反之拒绝任何一个单独假设的概率。虽然所有方法都会导致设计不均衡,有更多患者被分配到对照臂,但发现最优设计和所需患者数量会因所选择的检验效能描述方式而有很大差异。这些方法兼顾了连续型和二项式结果,并通过两个临床试验进行说明,一个涉及多剂量与安慰剂比较,另一个涉及联合治疗与单一疗法比较。在一个例子中,通过最优设计结合适当的检验效能描述,样本量减少了55%。