Adaptive sequential design for phase II single-arm oncology trials: an expansion of Simon’s design

References

• Bauer, P., and K. Kohne. 1994. Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. Biometrics Bulletin 50 (4):1029–1041. doi:10.2307/2533441.
   Google Scholar
• Chang, M. N., T. M. Therneau, H. S. Wieand, and S. S. Cha. 1987, Dec. Designs for group sequential phase II clinical trials. Biometrics Bulletin 43(4):865–874. doi:10.2307/2531540.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, T. T. 1997, Dec 15. Optimal three-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 16 (23):2701–2711. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19971215)16:23<2701:aid-sim704>3.0.co;2-1. PMID: 9421870.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. H. J., D. L. DeMets, and K. K. G. Lan. 2004 Apr 15. Increasing the sample size when the unblinded interim result is promising. Statistics in Medicine 23(7):1023–1038. doi:10.1002/sim.1688.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cui, L., H. M. Hung, and S. J. Wang. 1999. Modification of sample size in group sequential clinical trials. Biometrics Bulletin 55 (3):853–857. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.1999.00853.x.
   Google Scholar
• Devore, J. L. 1995. Probability and statistics for engineering and the sciences. 4th ed. USA: Duxbury Press.
   Google Scholar
• Englert, S., and M. Kieser. 2012, September. Improving the flexibility and efficiency of phase II designs for oncology trials. Biometrics Bulletin 68(3):886–892. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01720.x.
   Google Scholar
• Englert, S., and M. K. S. 2013, Nov. Optimal adaptive two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Biometrical Journal 55(6):955–968. doi:10.1002/bimj.201200220.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ensign, L. G., E. A. Gehan, D. S. Kamen, and P. F. Thall. 1994 Sep 15. An optimal three-stage design for phase II clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 13(17):1727–1736. doi:10.1002/sim.4780131704.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feller, W. 1945. On the normal approximation to the binomial distribution. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 16 (4):319–329. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731058.
   Google Scholar
• Gao, P., L. Liu, and C. Mehta. 2013 Oct 15. Exact inference for adaptive group sequential designs. Statistics in Medicine 32(23):3991–4005. doi:10.1002/sim.5847.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao, P., J. H. Ware, and C. Mehta. 2008. Sample size re-estimation for adaptive sequential designs. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 18 (6):1184–1196. doi:10.1080/10543400802369053.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jennison, C., and B. Turnbull. 2003. Mid-course sample size modification in clinical trials based on the observed treatment effect. Statistics in Medicine 22 (6):971–993. doi:10.1002/sim.1457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jennison, C., and B. Turnbull. 2006, Mar. Adaptive and non-adaptive group sequential tests. Biometrika 93(1):1–21. doi:10.1093/biomet/93.1.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung, S.-H., T. Lee, K. M. Kim, and S. L. George. 2004. Admissible two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 23 (4):561–569. doi:10.1002/sim.1600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunzmann, K., and M. Kieser. 2016. Optimal adaptive two-stage designs for single-arm trial with binary endpoint. arXiv:1605.00249 [stat.AP].
   Google Scholar
• Lan, K. K. G., and D. L. DeMets. 1983. Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika 70 (3):659–663. doi:10.2307/2336502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, Y., and W. J. Shih. 2004, Jun. Adaptive two-stage designs for arm phase Ha cancer clinical trials. Biometrics Bulletin 60(2):482–490. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.2004.00193.x.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, H. H., and H. Schäfer. 2001. Adaptive group sequential designs for clinical trials: Combining the advantages of adaptive and of classical group sequential approaches. Biometrics. 57 (3):886–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, P. C., and T. R. Fleming. 1979. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics Bulletin 35 (3):549–556. doi:10.2307/2530245.
   Google Scholar
• Pocock, S. J. 1977. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika 64 (2):191–199. doi:10.1093/biomet/64.2.191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proschan, M. A., and S. A. Hunsberger. 1995, Dec. Designed extension of studies based on conditional power. Biometrics Bulletin 51(4):1315–1324. doi:10.2307/2533262.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, R. 1989. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 10 (1):1–10. doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90015-9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2018, Dec. Oncology center of excellence/center for drug evaluation and research (CDER)/center for biologics evaluation and research (CBER). Clinical trial endpoints for the approval of cancer drugs and biologics. guidance for industry.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration (CDER and CBER). 2019. Guidance for industry adaptive design clinical trials for drugs and biologics.
   Google Scholar
• Zuma-1 trial protocol, 2015. https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1707447/suppl_file/nejmoa1707447_protocol.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Zuma-2 trial protocol, 2015. https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa1914347/suppl_file/nejmoa1914347_protocol.pdf.
   Google Scholar