4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Adaptive patient enrichment designs in therapeutic trials

期刊

BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL
卷 51, 期 2, 页码 358-374

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bimj.200900003

关键词

Adaptive enrichment algorithm; Futility; Nested patient subset; Strong control of experiment-wise type I error; Weighted Z-statistic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The utility of clinical trial designs with adaptive patient enrichment is investigated in an adequate and well-controlled trial setting. The overall treatment effect is the weighted average of the treatment effects in the mutually exclusive subsets of the originally intended entire study population. The adaptive enrichment approaches permit assessment of treatment effect that may be applicable to specific nested patient (sub)sets due to heterogeneous patient characteristics and/or differential response to treatment, e.g. a responsive patient subset versus a lack of beneficial patient subset, in all patient (sub)sets studied. The adaptive enrichment approaches considered include three adaptive design scenarios: (i) total sample size fixed and with futility stopping, (ii) sample size adaptation and futility stopping, and (iii) sample size adaptation without futility stopping. We show that regardless of whether the treatment effect eventually assessed is applicable to the originally studied patient population or only to the nested patient subsets; it is possible to devise an adaptive enrichment approach that statistically outperforms one-size-fits-all fixed design approach and the fixed design with a pre-specified multiple test procedure. We emphasize the need of additional studies to replicate the finding of a treatment effect in an enriched patient subset. The replication studies are likely to need fewer number of patients because of an identified treatment effect size that is larger than the diluted overall effect size. The adaptive designs, when applicable, are along the line of efficiency consideration in a drug development program.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据