Biomedical subjects

D Stephen Coad

Publications and source records attributed to D Stephen Coad.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2007

A comparison of adaptive allocation rules for group-sequential binary response clinical trials.

In clinical trials to compare two or more treatments with dichotomous responses, group-sequential designs may reduce the total number of patients involved in the trial and response-adaptive designs may result in fewer patients being assigned to the inferior treatments. In this paper, we combine group-sequential and response-adaptive designs, extending recent work on sample size re-estimation in trials to compare two treatments with normally distributed responses, to analogous binary response trials. We consider the use of two parameters of interest in the group-sequential design, the log odds ratio and the simple difference between the probabilities of success. In terms of the adaptive sampling rules, we study two urn models, the drop-the-loser rule and the randomized Pólya urn rule, and compare their properties with those of two sequential maximum likelihood estimation rules, which minimize the expected number of treatment failures. We investigate two ways in which adaptive urn designs can be used in conjunction with group-sequential designs. The first method updates the urn at each interim analysis and the second method continually updates the urn after each patient response, assuming immediate patient responses. Our simulation results show that the group-sequential design, which uses the drop-the-loser rule, applied fully sequentially, is the most effective method for reducing the expected number of treatment failures and the average sample number, whilst still maintaining the nominal error rates, over a range of success probabilities.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

PubMed2005

Sequential urn designs with elimination for comparing K > or =3 treatments.

A fully sequential procedure is proposed for comparing K > or =3 treatments with immediate binary responses. The procedure uses an adaptive urn design to randomize patients to the treatments and stopping rules are incorporated for eliminating less promising treatments. Simulation is used to assess the performance of the procedure for several adaptive urn designs, in terms of expected numbers of treatment failures and allocation proportions, and the effect on estimation at the end of the trial is also addressed. It is concluded that the drop-the-loser rule is more effective than equal allocation and all of the other designs considered. The practical benefits of the procedure are illustrated using the results of a three-treatment lung cancer study. It is then shown how the sequential elimination procedure may be used in dose-finding studies and its performance is compared with a recently proposed method. Several possible extensions to the work are briefly indicated.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2005

The use of the triangular test with response-adaptive treatment allocation.

A clinical trial is considered in which two treatments with binary responses are to be compared. A popular sequential stopping rule, the triangular test, is studied when various response-adaptive treatment allocation rules are applied, such as the recently proposed drop-the-loser rule, an urn randomization scheme. The paper extends previous work by Coad and Rosenberger, who combined the triangular test with the randomized play-the-winner rule. The purpose of the paper is to investigate to what extent the variability of an adaptive design affects the overall performance of the triangular test. The adaptive rules under consideration are described and some of their asymptotic properties are summarized. Simulation is then used to assess the performance of the triangular test when combined with the various adaptive rules. The main finding is that the drop-the-loser rule is the most promising of the adaptive rules considered in terms of a less variable allocation proportion and a smaller number of treatment failures. The use of this rule with the triangular test is beneficial compared with the triangular test with equal allocation, since it yields fewer treatment failures on average while providing comparable power with similar expected sample size. The results of an AIDS trial are used to illustrate the performance of the triangular test when combined with the drop-the-loser rule.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗