Adaptive Designs for Clinical Trials with Highly Successful Treatments
We compare the performance of two adaptive designs and equal allocation in a clinical trial with two highly successful treatments and binary outcomes. The measure of interest in the trial is the odds ratio. The goal of the adaptive design is to decrease the total number of failures compared to equal allocation while keeping the power at the same level. One design is based on sequential maximum likelihood estimation, the other on an urn model. We find that the urn model produces a better procedure than the sequential maximum likelihood approach and equal allocation, in that it yields fewer expected treatment failures, maintains the power of the asymptotic test, and is more powerful when the Fisher’s exact test is used. We conclude that adaptive designs have attractive properties when both treatments are highly successful.
Key WordsEthics Measures of association Optimal allocation Power Urn models
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Friedman LM, Furberg CD, DeMets DL. Fundamentals of Clinical Trials. Boston, MA: Wright PSG; 1981, 41.Google Scholar
- 5.Jennison C, Turnbull BW. Group Sequential Methods with Applications to Clinical Trials. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2000, 329.Google Scholar
- 7.Connor EM, Sperling RS, Gelber R, Kiselev P, Scott G, O’Sullivan MJ, VanDyke R, Bey M, Shearer W, Jacobson RL, Jiminez E, O’Neil E, Bazin B, Del-fraissy J, Culnane M, Coombs R, Elkins M, Moye J, Stratton P, Balsley J for the Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Protocol 076 Study Group. Reduction of maternal-infant transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 with zidovudine treatment. New Engl J Med. 1994;331:1173–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Ivanova AV, Rosenberger WF, Durham SD, Flournoy N. A birth and death urn for randomized clinical trials: asymptotic results. Sankhya B. 2000;62:104–118.Google Scholar