×

Randomized discontinuation trials with binary outcomes. (English) Zbl 1423.62141

Summary: Randomized discontinuation trial (RDT) has gained popularity across a number of therapeutic areas. Oncology is one of the most known. In the simplest case, at the initial open-label stage all patients are treated with the experimental treatment to identify a population of responders. This stage is followed by a randomized two-arm trial to compare two conditions, for example, treatment versus placebo. Potentially RDT increases the efficiency of trials relatively to traditional designs gaining information from a sensitized population if the open-label stage provides a reliable separation of responders from nonresponders. Often a sensitized population is called an enriched population, and respectively, the RDT is called “enrichment experiment”. We compare RDT with the traditional two-arm randomized clinical trials (RCT) for binary outcomes assuming that the population of interest consists of three groups: placebo responders, treatment-only responders, and nonresponders. Our results are derived in the “parameter estimation” setting and they are based on the comparison of estimator variances. We identify conditions under which RDT is either superior or inferior to RCT in terms of response rates, misclassification rates, and clinical ethics. Extension of our results to design optimization, hypothesis testing, and sample size calculation is rather straightforward.

MSC:

62P10 Applications of statistics to biology and medical sciences; meta analysis
62K05 Optimal statistical designs
62D05 Sampling theory, sample surveys
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Amery, W., and J. Dony. 1975. Clinical trial design avoiding undue placebo treatment. J. Clin. Pharmacol, October, 674-679. · doi:10.1002/j.1552-4604.1975.tb05919.x
[2] Burzykowski, T., G. Molenberghs, and M. Buyse. 2005. The evaluation of surrogate endpoints. New York, NY: Springer. · Zbl 1078.62113 · doi:10.1007/b138566
[3] Capra, W. B., Comparing the power of the discontinuation design to that of the classic randomized design on time-to-event endpoints, Controlled Clin. Trials, 25, 168-177 (2004) · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2003.11.005
[4] Chiron, C.; Dulac, O.; Gram, L., Vigabatrin withdrawal randomized study in children, Epilepsy Res., 25, 209-215 (1996) · doi:10.1016/S0920-1211(96)00028-9
[5] Fedorov, V. V.; Atkinson, A. C.; Dodge, Y. (ed.); Fedorov, V. V (ed.); Wynn, H. P (ed.), The optimum design of experiments in the presence of uncontrolled variability and prior information, 327-344 (1988), New York, NY · Zbl 0697.62065
[6] Fedorov, V. V., and P. Hackl. 1997. Model-oriented design of experiments. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. · Zbl 0878.62052 · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0703-0
[7] Fedorov, V. V., and T. Liu. 2005. Randomized discontinuation trials: Design and efficiency. GlaxoSmithKline Biomedical Data Science Technical Report, 2005-3. Available upon request (valerii.fedorov@quintiles.com).
[8] Fedorov, V. V.; Liu, T., Enrichment design, 1-8 (2007), New York, NY
[9] Fedorov, V. V.; Mannino, F.; Zhang, R., Consequences of dichotomization, Pharm. Stat., 8, 50-61 (2008) · doi:10.1002/pst.331
[10] Freidlin, B.; Simon, R., Evaluation of randomized discontinuation design, J. Clin. Oncol., 23, 5094-5098 (2005) · doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.02.520
[11] Hallstrom, A. P.; Friedman, L., Randomizing responders, Controlled Clin. Trials, 12, 486-503 (1991) · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(91)90009-B
[12] Kopec, J.; Abrahamowicz, M.; Esdaile, J., Randomized discontinuation trials: Utility and efficiency, J. Clin. Epidemiol., 46, 959-971 (1993) · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(93)90163-U
[13] Korn, E. L.; Arbuck, S. G.; Pulda, J. M.; Simon, R.; Kaplan, R. S.; Christian, M. C., Clinical trial designs for cytostatic agents: Are new approaches needed?, J. Clin. Oncol., 19, 265-272 (2001) · doi:10.1200/JCO.2001.19.1.265
[14] Lehmann, E., and G. Casella. 1998. Theory of point estimation. New York, NY: Springer. · Zbl 0916.62017
[15] MacLehose, R. R., B. C. Reeves, I. M. Harvey, T. A. Sheldon, I. T. Russell, and A. M. Black. 2000. A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomized and non-randomized studies. Health Technol. Assess., 41-154. http://www.hta.ac.uk/execsumm/summ434.htm
[16] Pablos-Méndez, A.; Barr, R. G.; Shea, S., Run-in periods in randomized trials, J. Am. Med. Assoc., 279, 222-225 (1998) · doi:10.1001/jama.279.3.222
[17] Rosner, G. L.; Stadler, W.; Ratain, M. J., Randomized discontinuation design: Application to cytostatic antineoplastic agents, J. Clin. Oncol., 20, 4478-4484 (2002) · doi:10.1200/JCO.2002.11.126
[18] Simon, R.; Maitournam, A., Evaluating the efficiency of targeted designs for randomized clinical trials, Clin. Cancer Res., 10, 7659-6763 (2004)
[19] Senn, S. J., Individual therapy: New dawn or false dawn, Drug Information J., 35, 1479-1494 (2001) · doi:10.1177/009286150103500443
[20] Senn, S. J., Individual response to treatment: Is it a valid assumption?, Br. Med. J., 329, 966-968 (2004) · doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7472.966
[21] Shao, J. 1999. Mathematical statistics. New York, NY: Springer. · Zbl 0935.62004
[22] Stadler, W. M.; Rosner, G.; Small, E.; Hollis, D.; Rini, B.; Zaentz, S. D.; Mahoney, J., Successful implementation of the randomized discontinuation trial design: An application to the study of the putative antiangiogenic agent carboxyaminoimidazole in renal cell carcinoma—calgb 69901, J. Clin. Oncol., 23, 3726-3732 (2005) · doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.44.150
[23] Trippa, L.; Rosner, G. L., Bayesian enrichment strategies for randomized discontinuation trials, Biometrics, 68, 203-225 (2012) · Zbl 1241.62169 · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01623.x
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.