Extension of a conditional performance score for sample size recalculation rules to the setting of binary endpoints.
Adaptive designs
Binary endpoint
Performance score
Sample size recalculation
Journal
BMC medical research methodology
ISSN: 1471-2288
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Res Methodol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968545
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Jan 2024
19 Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
08
05
2023
accepted:
12
01
2024
medline:
20
1
2024
pubmed:
20
1
2024
entrez:
19
1
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Sample size calculation is a central aspect in planning of clinical trials. The sample size is calculated based on parameter assumptions, like the treatment effect and the endpoint's variance. A fundamental problem of this approach is that the true distribution parameters are not known before the trial. Hence, sample size calculation always contains a certain degree of uncertainty, leading to the risk of underpowering or oversizing a trial. One way to cope with this uncertainty are adaptive designs. Adaptive designs allow to adjust the sample size during an interim analysis. There is a large number of such recalculation rules to choose from. To guide the choice of a suitable adaptive design with sample size recalculation, previous literature suggests a conditional performance score for studies with a normally distributed endpoint. However, binary endpoints are also frequently applied in clinical trials and the application of the conditional performance score to binary endpoints is not yet investigated. We extend the theory of the conditional performance score to binary endpoints by suggesting a related one-dimensional score parametrization. We moreover perform a simulation study to evaluate the operational characteristics and to illustrate application. We find that the score definition can be extended without modification to the case of binary endpoints. We represent the score results by a single distribution parameter, and therefore derive a single effect measure, which contains the difference in proportions [Formula: see text] between the intervention and the control group, as well as the endpoint proportion [Formula: see text] in the control group. This research extends the theory of the conditional performance score to binary endpoints and demonstrates its application in practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Sample size calculation is a central aspect in planning of clinical trials. The sample size is calculated based on parameter assumptions, like the treatment effect and the endpoint's variance. A fundamental problem of this approach is that the true distribution parameters are not known before the trial. Hence, sample size calculation always contains a certain degree of uncertainty, leading to the risk of underpowering or oversizing a trial. One way to cope with this uncertainty are adaptive designs. Adaptive designs allow to adjust the sample size during an interim analysis. There is a large number of such recalculation rules to choose from. To guide the choice of a suitable adaptive design with sample size recalculation, previous literature suggests a conditional performance score for studies with a normally distributed endpoint. However, binary endpoints are also frequently applied in clinical trials and the application of the conditional performance score to binary endpoints is not yet investigated.
METHODS
METHODS
We extend the theory of the conditional performance score to binary endpoints by suggesting a related one-dimensional score parametrization. We moreover perform a simulation study to evaluate the operational characteristics and to illustrate application.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We find that the score definition can be extended without modification to the case of binary endpoints. We represent the score results by a single distribution parameter, and therefore derive a single effect measure, which contains the difference in proportions [Formula: see text] between the intervention and the control group, as well as the endpoint proportion [Formula: see text] in the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This research extends the theory of the conditional performance score to binary endpoints and demonstrates its application in practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38243169
doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02150-4
pii: 10.1186/s12874-024-02150-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
15Subventions
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : RA 2347/4-2
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : RA 2347/4-2
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : KI 708/4-2
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : KI 708/4-2
Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : RA 2347/4-2
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Spiegelhalter DJ, Freedman LS. A predictive approach to selecting the size of a clinical trial, based on subjective clinical opinion. Stat Med. 1986;5(1):1–13.
doi: 10.1002/sim.4780050103
pubmed: 3961311
Lehmacher W, Wassmer G. Adaptive sample size calculations in group sequential trials. Biometrics. 1999;55(4):1286–90.
doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.1999.01286.x
pubmed: 11315085
Cui L, Hung HJ, Wang SJ. Modification of sample size in group sequential clinical trials. Biometrics. 1999;55(3):853–7.
doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.1999.00853.x
pubmed: 11315017
Proschan MA, Hunsberger SA. Designed extension of studies based on conditional power. Biometrics. 1995;51(4):1315–24.
Mehta CR, Pocock SJ. Adaptive increase in sample size when interim results are promising: a practical guide with examples. Stat Med. 2011;30(28):3267–84.
doi: 10.1002/sim.4102
pubmed: 22105690
Jennison C, Turnbull BW. Adaptive sample size modification in clinical trials: start small then ask for more? Stat Med. 2015;34(29):3793–810.
doi: 10.1002/sim.6575
pubmed: 26172385
Pilz M, Kunzmann K, Herrmann C, Rauch G, Kieser M. A variational approach to optimal two-stage designs. Stat Med. 2019;38(21):4159–71.
doi: 10.1002/sim.8291
pubmed: 31264243
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for industry: Adaptive design for clinical trials of drugs and biologics. 2019. https://www.fda.gov/media/78495/download . Accessed 13 Jan 2022.
European Medicines Agency (EMA) through its Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Reflection paper on methodological issues in confirmatory clinical trials planned with an adaptive design. 2007. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/reflection-paper-methodological-issues-confirmatory-clinical-trials-planned-adaptive-design_en.pdf . Accessed 13 Jan 2022.
Liu GF, Zhu GR, Cui L. Evaluating the adaptive performance of flexible sample size designs with treatment difference in an interval. Stat Med. 2008;27(4):584–96.
doi: 10.1002/sim.2998
pubmed: 17634972
Herrmann C, Pilz M, Kieser M, Rauch G. A new conditional performance score for the evaluation of adaptive group sequential designs with sample size recalculation. Stat Med. 2020;39(15):2067–100.
doi: 10.1002/sim.8534
pubmed: 32249968
Niewczas J, Kunz CU, König F. Interim analysis incorporating short-and long-term binary endpoints. Biom J. 2019;61(3):665–87.
doi: 10.1002/bimj.201700281
pubmed: 30694566
pmcid: 6590444
Wang C, Keller D, Lan K. Sample size re-estimation for binary data via conditional power. Proceedings of the Joint Statistical Meetings. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association; 2002. p. 3621–3626.
Heritier S, Lloyd CJ, Lo SN. Accurate p-values for adaptive designs with binary endpoints. Stat Med. 2017;36(17):2643–55.
doi: 10.1002/sim.7324
pubmed: 28470713
Pocock SJ. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika. 1977;64(2):191–9.
doi: 10.1093/biomet/64.2.191
Wassmer G, Brannath W. Group sequential and confirmatory adaptive designs in clinical trials. Heidelberg: Springer; 2016. p. 135–46.
Wassmer G, Brannath W. Group sequential and confirmatory adaptive designs in clinical trials. Heidelberg: Springer; 2016. p. 171–8.
Wassmer G, Brannath W. Group sequential and confirmatory adaptive designs in clinical trials. Heidelberg: Springer; 2016. p. 178–84.
Berger JO. Statistical decision theory and Bayesian analysis. New York: Springer, Science & Business Media; 1985.
Meinertz T, Kasper W, Schumacher M, Just H, APSAC Multicenter Trial Group, et al. The German multicenter trial of anisoylated plasminogen streptokinase activator complex versus heparin for acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1988;62(7):347–51.
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria; 2021. https://www.R-project.org/ . Accessed 13 Jan 2022.
Wasserman L. All of statistics: a concise course in statistical inference, Chap. The Wald Test. New York: Springer; 2004. p. 152–156.
Herrmann C, Kieser M, Rauch G, Pilz M. Optimization of adaptive designs with respect to a performance score. Biom J. 2022;64(6):989–1006.