Optimal, minimax, and Bayesian two-stage designs in two-dose phase II clinical trials

Background: For most cytotoxic and biologic anti-cancer agents, the response rate of the drug is commonly assumed to be non-decreasing with an increasing dose. However, an increasing dose does not always result in an appreciable increase in the response rate. This may especially be true at high doses for a biologic agent. Therefore, in a phase II trial the investigators may be interested in testing the anti-tumor activity of a drug at more than one (often two) doses, instead of only at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). This way, when the lower dose appears equally effective, this dose can be recommended for further confirmatory testing in a phase III trial under potential long-term toxicity and cost considerations. A common approach to designing such a phase II trial has been to use an independent (e.g., Simon's two-stage) design at each dose ignoring the prior knowledge about the ordering of the response probabilities at the different doses. However, failure to account for this ordering constraint in estimating the response probabilities may result in an inefficient design. In this dissertation, we developed extensions of Simon's optimal and minimax two-stage designs, including both frequentist and Bayesian methods, for two doses that assume ordered response rates between doses. ^ Methods: Optimal and minimax two-stage designs are proposed for phase II clinical trials in settings where the true response rates at two dose levels are ordered. We borrow strength between doses using isotonic regression and control the joint and/or marginal error probabilities. Bayesian two-stage designs are also proposed under a stochastic ordering constraint. ^ Results: Compared to Simon's designs, when controlling the power and type I error at the same levels, the proposed frequentist and Bayesian designs reduce the maximum and expected sample sizes. Most of the proposed designs also increase the probability of early termination when the true response rates are poor. ^ Conclusion: Proposed frequentist and Bayesian designs are superior to Simon's designs in terms of operating characteristics (expected sample size and probability of early termination, when the response rates are poor) Thus, the proposed designs lead to more cost-efficient and ethical trials, and may consequently improve and expedite the drug discovery process. The proposed designs may be extended to designs of multiple group trials and drug combination trials.^

Bayesian doubly optimal group sequential designs for randomized clinical trials

When conducting a randomized comparative clinical trial, ethical, scientific or economic considerations often motivate the use of interim decision rules after successive groups of patients have been treated. These decisions may pertain to the comparative efficacy or safety of the treatments under study, cost considerations, the desire to accelerate the drug evaluation process, or the likelihood of therapeutic benefit for future patients. At the time of each interim decision, an important question is whether patient enrollment should continue or be terminated; either due to a high probability that one treatment is superior to the other, or a low probability that the experimental treatment will ultimately prove to be superior. The use of frequentist group sequential decision rules has become routine in the conduct of phase III clinical trials. In this dissertation, we will present a new Bayesian decision-theoretic approach to the problem of designing a randomized group sequential clinical trial, focusing on two-arm trials with time-to-failure outcomes. Forward simulation is used to obtain optimal decision boundaries for each of a set of possible models. At each interim analysis, we use Bayesian model selection to adaptively choose the model having the largest posterior probability of being correct, and we then make the interim decision based on the boundaries that are optimal under the chosen model. We provide a simulation study to compare this method, which we call Bayesian Doubly Optimal Group Sequential (BDOGS), to corresponding frequentist designs using either O'Brien-Fleming (OF) or Pocock boundaries, as obtained from EaSt 2000. Our simulation results show that, over a wide variety of different cases, BDOGS either performs at least as well as both OF and Pocock, or on average provides a much smaller trial. ^

Bayesian joint modeling of longitudinal and survival data

The joint modeling of longitudinal and survival data is a new approach to many applications such as HIV, cancer vaccine trials and quality of life studies. There are recent developments of the methodologies with respect to each of the components of the joint model as well as statistical processes that link them together. Among these, second order polynomial random effect models and linear mixed effects models are the most commonly used for the longitudinal trajectory function. In this study, we first relax the parametric constraints for polynomial random effect models by using Dirichlet process priors, then three longitudinal markers rather than only one marker are considered in one joint model. Second, we use a linear mixed effect model for the longitudinal process in a joint model analyzing the three markers. In this research these methods were applied to the Primary Biliary Cirrhosis sequential data, which were collected from a clinical trial of primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) of the liver. This trial was conducted between 1974 and 1984 at the Mayo Clinic. The effects of three longitudinal markers (1) Total Serum Bilirubin, (2) Serum Albumin and (3) Serum Glutamic-Oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT) on patients' survival were investigated. Proportion of treatment effect will also be studied using the proposed joint modeling approaches. ^ Based on the results, we conclude that the proposed modeling approaches yield better fit to the data and give less biased parameter estimates for these trajectory functions than previous methods. Model fit is also improved after considering three longitudinal markers instead of one marker only. The results from analysis of proportion of treatment effects from these joint models indicate same conclusion as that from the final model of Fleming and Harrington (1991), which is Bilirubin and Albumin together has stronger impact in predicting patients' survival and as a surrogate endpoints for treatment. ^