Outcome-based adaptive randomization for binary data in clinical trials---Compare and contrast

Monte Carlo simulation has been conducted to investigate parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in some well known adaptive randomization procedures. The four urn models studied are Randomized Play-the-Winner (RPW), Randomized Pôlya Urn (RPU), Birth and Death Urn with Immigration (BDUI), and Drop-the-Loses Urn (DL). Two sequential estimation methods, the sequential maximum likelihood estimation (SMLE) and the doubly adaptive biased coin design (DABC), are simulated at three optimal allocation targets that minimize the expected number of failures under the assumption of constant variance of simple difference (RSIHR), relative risk (ORR), and odds ratio (OOR) respectively. Log likelihood ratio test and three Wald-type tests (simple difference, log of relative risk, log of odds ratio) are compared in different adaptive procedures. ^ Simulation results indicates that although RPW is slightly better in assigning more patients to the superior treatment, the DL method is considerably less variable and the test statistics have better normality. When compared with SMLE, DABC has slightly higher overall response rate with lower variance, but has larger bias and variance in parameter estimation. Additionally, the test statistics in SMLE have better normality and lower type I error rate, and the power of hypothesis testing is more comparable with the equal randomization. Usually, RSIHR has the highest power among the 3 optimal allocation ratios. However, the ORR allocation has better power and lower type I error rate when the log of relative risk is the test statistics. The number of expected failures in ORR is smaller than RSIHR. It is also shown that the simple difference of response rates has the worst normality among all 4 test statistics. The power of hypothesis test is always inflated when simple difference is used. On the other hand, the normality of the log likelihood ratio test statistics is robust against the change of adaptive randomization procedures. ^

Logistic regression with incompletely observed binary

Logistic regression is one of the most important tools in the analysis of epidemiological and clinical data. Such data often contain missing values for one or more variables. Common practice is to eliminate all individuals for whom any information is missing. This deletion approach does not make efficient use of available information and often introduces bias.^ Two methods were developed to estimate logistic regression coefficients for mixed dichotomous and continuous covariates including partially observed binary covariates. The data were assumed missing at random (MAR). One method (PD) used predictive distribution as weight to calculate the average of the logistic regressions performing on all possible values of missing observations, and the second method (RS) used a variant of resampling technique. Additional seven methods were compared with these two approaches in a simulation study. They are: (1) Analysis based on only the complete cases, (2) Substituting the mean of the observed values for the missing value, (3) An imputation technique based on the proportions of observed data, (4) Regressing the partially observed covariates on the remaining continuous covariates, (5) Regressing the partially observed covariates on the remaining continuous covariates conditional on response variable, (6) Regressing the partially observed covariates on the remaining continuous covariates and response variable, and (7) EM algorithm. Both proposed methods showed smaller standard errors (s.e.) for the coefficient involving the partially observed covariate and for the other coefficients as well. However, both methods, especially PD, are computationally demanding; thus for analysis of large data sets with partially observed covariates, further refinement of these approaches is needed. ^