Statistical testing strategies for assessing treatment efficacy and marker accuracy in phase III trials

When a candidate predictive marker is available, but evidence on its predictive ability is not sufficiently reliable, all‐comers trials with marker stratification are frequently conducted. We propose a framework for planning and evaluating prospective testing strategies in confirmatory, phase III marker‐stratified clinical trials based on a natural assumption on heterogeneity of treatment effects across marker‐defined subpopulations, where weak rather than strong control is permitted for multiple population tests. For phase III marker‐stratified trials, it is expected that treatment efficacy is established in a particular patient population, possibly in a marker‐defined subpopulation, and that the marker accuracy is assessed when the marker is used to restrict the indication or labelling of the treatment to a marker‐based subpopulation, ie, assessment of the clinical validity of the marker. In this paper, we develop statistical testing strategies based on criteria that are explicitly designated to the marker assessment, including those examining treatment effects in marker‐negative patients. As existing and developed statistical testing strategies can assert treatment efficacy for either the overall patient population or the marker‐positive subpopulation, we also develop criteria for evaluating the operating characteristics of the statistical testing strategies based on the probabilities of asserting treatment efficacy across marker subpopulations. Numerical evaluations to compare the statistical testing strategies based on the developed criteria are provided.     

Blinded continuous monitoring in clinical trials with recurrent event endpoints

In studies with recurrent event endpoints, misspecified assumptions of event rates or dispersion can lead to underpowered trials or overexposure of patients. Specification of overdispersion is often a particular problem as it is usually not reported in clinical trial publications. Changing event rates over the years have been described for some diseases, adding to the uncertainty in planning. To mitigate the risks of inadequate sample sizes, internal pilot study designs have been proposed with a preference for blinded sample size reestimation procedures, as they generally do not affect the type I error rate and maintain trial integrity. Blinded sample size reestimation procedures are available for trials with recurrent events as endpoints. However, the variance in the reestimated sample size can be considerable in particular with early sample size reviews. Motivated by a randomized controlled trial in paediatric multiple sclerosis, a rare neurological condition in children, we apply the concept of blinded continuous monitoring of information, which is known to reduce the variance in the resulting sample size. Assuming negative binomial distributions for the counts of recurrent relapses, we derive information criteria and propose blinded continuous monitoring procedures. The operating characteristics of these are assessed in Monte Carlo trial simulations demonstrating favourable properties with regard to type I error rate, power, and stopping time, ie, sample size.     

Properties of the weighted log‐rank test in the design of confirmatory studies with delayed effects

Proportional hazards are a common assumption when designing confirmatory clinical trials in oncology. This assumption not only affects the analysis part but also the sample size calculation. The presence of delayed effects causes a change in the hazard ratio while the trial is ongoing since at the beginning we do not observe any difference between treatment arms, and after some unknown time point, the differences between treatment arms will start to appear. Hence, the proportional hazards assumption no longer holds, and both sample size calculation and analysis methods to be used should be reconsidered. The weighted log‐rank test allows a weighting for early, middle, and late differences through the Fleming and Harrington class of weights and is proven to be more efficient when the proportional hazards assumption does not hold. The Fleming and Harrington class of weights, along with the estimated delay, can be incorporated into the sample size calculation in order to maintain the desired power once the treatment arm differences start to appear. In this article, we explore the impact of delayed effects in group sequential and adaptive group sequential designs and make an empirical evaluation in terms of power and type‐I error rate of the of the weighted log‐rank test in a simulated scenario with fixed values of the Fleming and Harrington class of weights. We also give some practical recommendations regarding which methodology should be used in the presence of delayed effects depending on certain characteristics of the trial.     

英国的刑事上诉制度研究

英国对刑事案件基本上实行两级上诉制度 :对于刑事法院的一审裁判可以依次向上诉法院和上议院上诉 ;对治安法院的裁判 ,可以分别向刑事法院或者高等法院以及上议院上诉 ,但是 ,二者的程序规则不完全相同。2 0世纪 70年代以来 ,英国上诉制度逐渐向大陆法系靠拢 ,最近英国政府再次提议进一步扩大控诉方的上诉权 ,英国上诉制度可能将发生重大变化。     

A modified random-effect procedure for combining risk difference in sets of 2×2 tables from clinical trials

Summary Meta-analyses of sets of clinical trials often combine risk differences from several 2×2 tables according to a random-effects model. The DerSimonian-Laird random-effects procedure, widely used for estimating the populaton mean risk difference, weights the risk difference from each primary study inversely proportional to an estimate of its variance (the sum of the between-study variance and the conditional within-study variance). Because those weights are not independent of the risk differences, however, the procedure sometimes exhibits bias and unnatural behavior. The present paper proposes a modified weighting scheme that uses the unconditional within-study variance to avoid this source of bias. The modified procedure has variance closer to that available from weighting by ideal weights when such weights are known. We studied the modified procedure in extensive simulation experiments using situations whose parameters resemble those of actual studies in medical research. For comparison we also included two unbiased procedures, the unweighted mean and a sample-size-weighted mean; their relative variability depends on the extent of heterogeneity among the primary studies. An example illustrates the application of the procedures to actual data and the differences among the results. This research was supported by Grant HS 05936 from the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research to Harvard University.     

Improving the contributions of technology assessment to the health care system of the U.S.A.

Summary Based on 14 case studies of highly effective therapies and the reasons they succeeded less frequently than they could, we propose a variety of steps to improve the health care system of the U.S.A. Whatever proposal emerges from current national debates until innovations are shown to be safe and effective, they should not be supported; when slightly better technologies are much more expensive than other good ones we need to consider appropriate choices carefully; simplified billing and bookkeping would reduce our costs; when a technology is rapidly introduced cautionnary measures may be needed; tracking immunization and repairing their omissions requires a new system; educational programs such as seen effective in hypertension should be applied in other areas such as vaccination; in organ transplantation the nation should consider “presumed consent”; our payment system sometimes creates perverse incentives and therefore needs review; and the preferences of the public in allocation of health resources need to be discovered once the public is informed about the issues. Research supported by Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.     

Treatment Choice With Trial Data: Statistical Decision Theory Should Supplant Hypothesis Testing

Abstract

A central objective of empirical research on treatment response is to inform treatment choice. Unfortunately, researchers commonly use concepts of statistical inference whose foundations are distant from the problem of treatment choice. It has been particularly common to use hypothesis tests to compare treatments. Wald’s development of statistical decision theory provides a coherent frequentist framework for use of sample data on treatment response to make treatment decisions. A body of recent research applies statistical decision theory to characterize uniformly satisfactory treatment choices, in the sense of maximum loss relative to optimal decisions (also known as maximum regret). This article describes the basic ideas and findings, which provide an appealing practical alternative to use of hypothesis tests. For simplicity, the article focuses on medical treatment with evidence from classical randomized clinical trials. The ideas apply generally, encompassing use of observational data and treatment choice in nonmedical contexts.     

The precision of regression-type estimator for incremental cost–effectiveness ratio

The estimation of incremental cost–effectiveness ratio (ICER) has received increasing attention recently. It is expressed in terms of the ratio of the change in costs of a therapeutic intervention to the change in the effects of the intervention. Despite the intuitive interpretation of ICER as an additional cost per additional benefit unit, it is a challenge to estimate the distribution of a ratio of two stochastically dependent distributions. A vast literature regarding the statistical methods of ICER has developed in the past two decades, but none of these methods provide an unbiased estimator. Here, to obtain the unbiased estimator of the cost–effectiveness ratio (CER), the zero intercept of the bivariate normal regression is assumed. In equal sample sizes, the Iman–Conover algorithm is applied to construct the desired variance–covariance matrix of two random bivariate samples, and the estimation then follows the same approach as CER to obtain the unbiased estimator of ICER. The bootstrapping method with the Iman–Conover algorithm is employed for unequal sample sizes. Simulation experiments are conducted to evaluate the proposed method. The regression-type estimator performs overwhelmingly better than the sample mean estimator in terms of mean squared error in all cases.     

Utilizing Bayesian predictive power in clinical trial design

The Bayesian paradigm provides an ideal platform to update uncertainties and carry them over into the future in the presence of data. Bayesian predictive power (BPP) reflects our belief in the eventual success of a clinical trial to meet its goals. In this paper we derive mathematical expressions for the most common types of outcomes, to make the BPP accessible to practitioners, facilitate fast computations in adaptive trial design simulations that use interim futility monitoring, and propose an organized BPP-based phase II-to-phase III design framework.     

Response‐adaptive designs for binary responses: How to offer patient benefit while being robust to time trends?

Response‐adaptive randomisation (RAR) can considerably improve the chances of a successful treatment outcome for patients in a clinical trial by skewing the allocation probability towards better performing treatments as data accumulates. There is considerable interest in using RAR designs in drug development for rare diseases, where traditional designs are not either feasible or ethically questionable. In this paper, we discuss and address a major criticism levelled at RAR: namely, type I error inflation due to an unknown time trend over the course of the trial. The most common cause of this phenomenon is changes in the characteristics of recruited patients—referred to as patient drift. This is a realistic concern for clinical trials in rare diseases due to their lengthly accrual rate. We compute the type I error inflation as a function of the time trend magnitude to determine in which contexts the problem is most exacerbated. We then assess the ability of different correction methods to preserve type I error in these contexts and their performance in terms of other operating characteristics, including patient benefit and power. We make recommendations as to which correction methods are most suitable in the rare disease context for several RAR rules, differentiating between the 2‐armed and the multi‐armed case. We further propose a RAR design for multi‐armed clinical trials, which is computationally efficient and robust to several time trends considered.