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. ^

The imaging and dosimetric capabilities of a CT/MR-suitable, anatomically adaptive, shielded intracavitary brachytherapy applicator for the treatment of cervical cancer

Introduction. Investigations into the shortcomings of current intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) technology has lead us to design an Anatomically Adaptive Applicator (A3). The goal of this work was to design and characterize the imaging and dosimetric capabilities of this device. The A3 design incorporates a single shield that can both rotate and translate within the colpostat. We hypothesized that this feature, coupled with specific A3 component construction materials and imaging techniques, would facilitate artifact-free CT and MR image acquisition. In addition, by shaping the delivered dose distribution via the A3 movable shield, dose delivered to the rectum will be less compared to equivalent treatments utilizing current state-of-the-art ICBT applicators. ^ Method and materials. A method was developed to facilitate an artifact-free CT imaging protocol that used a "step-and-shoot" technique: pausing the scanner midway through the scan and moving the A 3 shield out of the path of the beam. The A3 CT imaging capabilities were demonstrated acquiring images of a phantom that positioned the A3 and FW applicators in a clinically-applicable geometry. Artifact-free MRI imaging was achieved by utilizing MRI-compatible ovoid components and pulse-sequences that minimize susceptibility artifacts. Artifacts were qualitatively compared, in a clinical setup. For the dosimetric study, Monte-Carlo (MC) models of the A3 and FW (shielded and unshielded) applicators were validated. These models were incorporated into a MC model of one cervical cancer patient ICBT insertion, using 192Ir (mHDR v2 source). The A3 shield's rotation and translation was adjusted for each dwell position to minimize dose to the rectum. Superposition of dose to rectum for all A3 dwell sources (4 per ovoid) was applied to obtain a comparison of equivalent FW treatments. Rectal dose-volume histograms (absolute and HDR/PDR biologically effective dose (BED)) and BED to 2 cc (BED2cc ) were determined for all applicators and compared. ^ Results. Using a "step-and-shoot" CT scanning method and MR compliant materials and optimized pulse-sequences, images of the A 3 were nearly artifact-free for both modalities. The A3 reduced BED2cc by 18.5% and 7.2% for a PDR treatment and 22.4% and 8.7% for a HDR treatment compared to treatments delivered using an uFW and sFW applicator, respectively. ^ Conclusions. The novel design of the A3 facilitated nearly artifact-free image quality for both CT and MR clinical imaging protocols. The design also facilitated a reduction in BED to the rectum compared to equivalent ICBT treatments delivered using current, state-of-the-art applicators. ^