Abstract
In many pivotal clinical trials, timing and frequency of interim analyses are important for ethical treatment of patients and for practical and regulatory purposes. It is often desirable to evaluate a large trial of a new treatment that has some safety risk in order to stop or modify the trial based on the emerging risk–benefit profile compared to control treatment. Statistical considerations would suggest not stopping too soon in order to avoid large Type I or Type II error or basing a decision on inadequate data. Regulators often prefer to minimize interim analyses of efficacy due to presumed bias created by early stopping and an inability to adequately evaluate important secondary efficacy endpoints, safety, or the general risk–benefit profile for the new treatment. For practical purposes, analyses must be done soon enough to have a meaningful impact on the trial. For the same reason, limiting enrollment rates and ensuring prompt collection and analysis of data are important. We discuss tradeoffs between these factors in deciding when to perform interim analyses. In addition to formal evaluations for early positive efficacy findings, there are different considerations for trials early in the development process, for safety monitoring during a trial, and for futility analyses. We consider logistical and regulatory issues throughout.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson KM (2012) gsdesign: Group sequential design. R package version 2.9.2
Bauer P, Koenig F, Brannath W, Posch M (2010) Selection and bias – two hostile brothers. Stat Med 29:1–13
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (2010) Guidance for industry. Adaptive design clinical trials for drugs and biologics. Draft guidance. United States Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, URL http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm201790.pdf
Demetri GD, van Oosterom AT, Garrett CR, Blackstein ME, Shah MH, Verweij J, McArthur G, Judson IR, Heinrich MC, Morgan JA, Desai J, Fletcher CD, George S, Bello CL, Huang X, Baum CM, Casali PG (2006) Efficacy and safety of sunitinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour after failure of imatinib: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 368:1329–1338. doi: 10.1016/ S0140-6736(06)69446-4
Dragalin V (2006) Adaptive designs: terminology and classification. Drug Inform J 40:425–435. doi: 0092-8615/2006
EPILOG Investigators (1996) Platelet glycoprotein iib/iiia receptor blockade and low-dose heparin during percutaneous coronary revascularization. New Engl J Med 336:1689–1696
Jennison C, Turnbull BW (2000) Group sequential methods with applications to clinical trials. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton
Ji Y, Liu P, Li Y, Bekele BN (2010) A modified toxicity probability interval method for dose-finding trials. Clin Trials 7:653–663. doi: 10.1177/ 1740774510382799
Lan KKG, DeMets DL (1983) Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika 70:659–663
Lee JJ, Liu DD (2008) A predictive probability design for phase ii cancer clinical trials. Clin Trials 5:93–106
Mehta C, Tsiatis AA (2001) Flexible sample size considerations using information-based interim monitoring. Drug Inform J 35:1095–1112
O’Brien PC, Fleming TR (1979) A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrika 35:549–556
O’Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L (1990) Continual reassessment method for phase i clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 46:33–48
Scharfstein DO, Tsiatis AA, Robins JM (1997) Semiparametric efficiency and its implication on the design and analysis of group-sequential studies. J Am Stat Assoc 92:1342–1350
Siegmund D (1985) Sequential analysis. Tests and confidence intervals. Spring, New York
Simon R (1989) Optimal two-stage designs for phase ii clinical trials. Contr Clin Trials 10:1–10
The Coronary Drug Project Research Group (1981) Practical aspects of decision making in clinical trials: The coronary drug project as a case study. Contr Clin Trials 1:363–376
The PURSUIT Investigators (1998) Inhibition of platelet glycoprotein iib/iiia with eptifibatide in patients with acute coronary syndromes. New Engl J Med 339:436–443
The REST Study Group (2006) Safety and efficacy of a pentavalent humaâĂŞbovine (wc3) reassortant rotavirus vaccine. New Engl J Med 354:23–33
Tsiatis AA (2006) Information-based monitoring of clinical trials. Stat Med 25:3236–3244. doi: 10.1002
Wald A (1945) Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. Ann Math Stat 16:117–186. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177731118
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Anderson, K.M. (2014). Timing and Frequency of Interim Analyses in Confirmatory Trials. In: He, W., Pinheiro, J., Kuznetsova, O. (eds) Practical Considerations for Adaptive Trial Design and Implementation. Statistics for Biology and Health. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1100-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1100-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1099-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1100-4
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)