Suppr超能文献

具有多个共同主要终点的序贯分组试验中疗效或无效性的中期评估。

Interim evaluation of efficacy or futility in group-sequential trials with multiple co-primary endpoints.

作者信息

Asakura Koko, Hamasaki Toshimitsu, Evans Scott R

机构信息

Department of Data Science, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, Suita, Osaka, 565-8565, Japan.

Department of Innovative Clinical Trials and Data Science, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan.

出版信息

Biom J. 2017 Jul;59(4):703-731. doi: 10.1002/bimj.201600026. Epub 2016 Oct 19.

Abstract

We discuss group-sequential designs in superiority clinical trials with multiple co-primary endpoints, that is, when trials are designed to evaluate if the test intervention is superior to the control on all primary endpoints. We consider several decision-making frameworks for evaluating efficacy or futility, based on boundaries using group-sequential methodology. We incorporate the correlations among the endpoints into the calculations for futility boundaries and sample sizes as a function of other design parameters, including mean differences, the number of analyses, and efficacy boundaries. We investigate the operating characteristics of the proposed decision-making frameworks in terms of efficacy/futility boundaries, power, the Type I error rate, and sample sizes, while varying the number of analyses, the correlations among the endpoints, and the mean differences. We provide an example to illustrate the methods and discuss practical considerations when designing efficient group-sequential designs in clinical trials with co-primary endpoints.

摘要

我们讨论具有多个共同主要终点的优效性临床试验中的序贯分组设计,即当试验旨在评估试验干预在所有主要终点上是否优于对照时的情况。我们基于序贯分组方法的界值,考虑了几种用于评估疗效或无效性的决策框架。我们将终点之间的相关性纳入无效性界值和样本量的计算中,作为其他设计参数的函数,这些参数包括均值差异、分析次数和疗效界值。我们在改变分析次数、终点之间的相关性和均值差异的同时,从疗效/无效性界值、检验效能、I 型错误率和样本量方面研究了所提出的决策框架的操作特征。我们提供了一个例子来说明这些方法,并讨论在具有共同主要终点的临床试验中设计高效序贯分组设计时的实际考虑因素。

相似文献

1
Interim evaluation of efficacy or futility in group-sequential trials with multiple co-primary endpoints.
Biom J. 2017 Jul;59(4):703-731. doi: 10.1002/bimj.201600026. Epub 2016 Oct 19.
2
Choice of futility boundaries for group sequential designs with two endpoints.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Aug 8;17(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0387-4.
3
Sample size determination in group-sequential clinical trials with two co-primary endpoints.
Stat Med. 2014 Jul 30;33(17):2897-913. doi: 10.1002/sim.6154. Epub 2014 Mar 27.
5
Optimal futility stopping boundaries for binary endpoints.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Mar 28;24(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02190-w.
6
Optimality criteria for futility stopping boundaries for group sequential designs with a continuous endpoint.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Nov 5;20(1):274. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01141-5.
7
Futility interim monitoring with control of type I and II error probabilities using the interim Z-value or confidence limit.
Clin Trials. 2009 Dec;6(6):565-73. doi: 10.1177/1740774509350327. Epub 2009 Nov 23.
8
Comparison of futility monitoring guidelines using completed phase III oncology trials.
Clin Trials. 2017 Feb;14(1):48-58. doi: 10.1177/1740774516666502. Epub 2016 Sep 22.
9
Interim Monitoring for Futility in Clinical Trials with Two Co-primary Endpoints Using Prediction.
Stat Biopharm Res. 2020;12(2):164-175. doi: 10.1080/19466315.2019.1677494. Epub 2019 Nov 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Group sequential two-stage preference designs.
Stat Med. 2024 Jan 30;43(2):315-341. doi: 10.1002/sim.9962. Epub 2023 Nov 27.
3
On selecting the critical boundary functions in group-sequential trials with two time-to-event outcomes.
Contemp Clin Trials. 2021 Feb;101:106244. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2020.106244. Epub 2020 Dec 9.
4
Interim Monitoring for Futility in Clinical Trials with Two Co-primary Endpoints Using Prediction.
Stat Biopharm Res. 2020;12(2):164-175. doi: 10.1080/19466315.2019.1677494. Epub 2019 Nov 4.
5
Surgery for women with endometrioma prior to fertilisation: proposal for a feasible multicentre randomised clinical trial in the UK.
Hum Reprod Open. 2020 Jun 6;2020(3):hoaa012. doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa012. eCollection 2020.
6
Design, data monitoring, and analysis of clinical trials with co-primary endpoints: A review.
J Biopharm Stat. 2018;28(1):28-51. doi: 10.1080/10543406.2017.1378668. Epub 2017 Oct 30.

本文引用的文献

1
Statistical challenges in a regulatory review of cardiovascular and CNS clinical trials.
J Biopharm Stat. 2016;26(1):37-43. doi: 10.1080/10543406.2015.1092025.
2
Group-Sequential Strategies in Clinical Trials with Multiple Co-Primary Outcomes.
Stat Biopharm Res. 2015;7(1):36-54. doi: 10.1080/19466315.2014.1003090.
3
Sample size determination in group-sequential clinical trials with two co-primary endpoints.
Stat Med. 2014 Jul 30;33(17):2897-913. doi: 10.1002/sim.6154. Epub 2014 Mar 27.
4
A logrank test-based method for sizing clinical trials with two co-primary time-to-event endpoints.
Biostatistics. 2013 Jul;14(3):409-21. doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxs057. Epub 2013 Jan 10.
5
Sample size determination for clinical trials with co-primary outcomes: exponential event times.
Pharm Stat. 2013 Jan-Feb;12(1):28-34. doi: 10.1002/pst.1545. Epub 2012 Oct 19.
7
Method of balanced adjustment in testing co-primary endpoints.
Stat Med. 2010 Aug 30;29(19):2055-66. doi: 10.1002/sim.3950.
8
Testing a primary and a secondary endpoint in a group sequential design.
Biometrics. 2010 Dec;66(4):1174-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01402.x.
10
Hierarchical testing of multiple endpoints in group-sequential trials.
Stat Med. 2010 Jan 30;29(2):219-28. doi: 10.1002/sim.3748.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验