Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Methodology

Bayesian dose selection design for a binary outcome using restricted response adaptive randomization

Authors: Caitlyn Meinzer, Renee Martin, Jose I. Suarez

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In phase II trials, the most efficacious dose is usually not known. Moreover, given limited resources, it is difficult to robustly identify a dose while also testing for a signal of efficacy that would support a phase III trial. Recent designs have sought to be more efficient by exploring multiple doses through the use of adaptive strategies. However, the added flexibility may potentially increase the risk of making incorrect assumptions and reduce the total amount of information available across the dose range as a function of imbalanced sample size.

Methods

To balance these challenges, a novel placebo-controlled design is presented in which a restricted Bayesian response adaptive randomization (RAR) is used to allocate a majority of subjects to the optimal dose of active drug, defined as the dose with the lowest probability of poor outcome. However, the allocation between subjects who receive active drug or placebo is held constant to retain the maximum possible power for a hypothesis test of overall efficacy comparing the optimal dose to placebo. The design properties and optimization of the design are presented in the context of a phase II trial for subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Results

For a fixed total sample size, a trade-off exists between the ability to select the optimal dose and the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis. This relationship is modified by the allocation ratio between active and control subjects, the choice of RAR algorithm, and the number of subjects allocated to an initial fixed allocation period. While a responsive RAR algorithm improves the ability to select the correct dose, there is an increased risk of assigning more subjects to a worse arm as a function of ephemeral trends in the data. A subarachnoid treatment trial is used to illustrate how this design can be customized for specific objectives and available data.

Conclusions

Bayesian adaptive designs are a flexible approach to addressing multiple questions surrounding the optimal dose for treatment efficacy within the context of limited resources. While the design is general enough to apply to many situations, future work is needed to address interim analyses and the incorporation of models for dose response.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Thall PF, Russell KE. A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes in phase I/II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1998; 54(1):251–64.CrossRefPubMed Thall PF, Russell KE. A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes in phase I/II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1998; 54(1):251–64.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Simon R, Wittes R, Ellenberg S. Randomized phase II clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rep. 1985; 69(12):1375–81.PubMed Simon R, Wittes R, Ellenberg S. Randomized phase II clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rep. 1985; 69(12):1375–81.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Bretz F, Hsu J, Pinheiro J, Liu Y. Dose finding—a challenge in statistics. Biom J. 2008; 50(4):480–504.CrossRefPubMed Bretz F, Hsu J, Pinheiro J, Liu Y. Dose finding—a challenge in statistics. Biom J. 2008; 50(4):480–504.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Whitehead J. Designing phase II studies in the context of a programme of clinical research. Biometrics. 1985; 41(2):373–83.CrossRefPubMed Whitehead J. Designing phase II studies in the context of a programme of clinical research. Biometrics. 1985; 41(2):373–83.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Whitehead J. Sample sizes for phase II and phase III clinical trials: an integrated approach. Stat Med. 1986; 5(5):459–64.CrossRefPubMed Whitehead J. Sample sizes for phase II and phase III clinical trials: an integrated approach. Stat Med. 1986; 5(5):459–64.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
go back to reference Meurer WJ, Lewis RJ, Tagle D, Fetters MD, Legocki L, Berry S, Connor J, Durkalski V, Elm J, Zhao W, et al. An overview of the Adaptive Designs Accelerating Promising Trials Into Treatments (ADAPT-IT) project. Ann Emerg Med. 2012; 60(4):451–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Meurer WJ, Lewis RJ, Tagle D, Fetters MD, Legocki L, Berry S, Connor J, Durkalski V, Elm J, Zhao W, et al. An overview of the Adaptive Designs Accelerating Promising Trials Into Treatments (ADAPT-IT) project. Ann Emerg Med. 2012; 60(4):451–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Legocki LJ, Meurer WJ, Frederiksen S, Lewis RJ, Durkalski VL, Berry DA, Barsan WG, Fetters MD. Clinical trialist perspectives on the ethics of adaptive clinical trials: a mixed-methods analysis. BMC Med Ethics. 2015; 16(1):1.CrossRef Legocki LJ, Meurer WJ, Frederiksen S, Lewis RJ, Durkalski VL, Berry DA, Barsan WG, Fetters MD. Clinical trialist perspectives on the ethics of adaptive clinical trials: a mixed-methods analysis. BMC Med Ethics. 2015; 16(1):1.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Dmitrienko A, Enas G, Gaydos B, Hsu CH, König F, Krams M, Liu Q, Neuenschwander B, et al. Innovative approaches for designing and analyzing adaptive dose-ranging trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2007; 17(6):965–95.CrossRefPubMed Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Dmitrienko A, Enas G, Gaydos B, Hsu CH, König F, Krams M, Liu Q, Neuenschwander B, et al. Innovative approaches for designing and analyzing adaptive dose-ranging trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2007; 17(6):965–95.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Berry SM, Spinelli W, Littman GS, Liang JZ, Fardipour P, Berry DA, Lewis RJ, Krams M. A Bayesian dose-finding trial with adaptive dose expansion to flexibly assess efficacy and safety of an investigational drug. Clin Trials. 2010; 7(2):121–35.CrossRefPubMed Berry SM, Spinelli W, Littman GS, Liang JZ, Fardipour P, Berry DA, Lewis RJ, Krams M. A Bayesian dose-finding trial with adaptive dose expansion to flexibly assess efficacy and safety of an investigational drug. Clin Trials. 2010; 7(2):121–35.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Thall P, Fox P, Wathen J. Statistical controversies in clinical research: scientific and ethical problems with adaptive randomization in comparative clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2015; 26(8):238.CrossRef Thall P, Fox P, Wathen J. Statistical controversies in clinical research: scientific and ethical problems with adaptive randomization in comparative clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2015; 26(8):238.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Rosenberger WF, Hu F. Maximizing power and minimizing treatment failures in clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2004; 1(2):141–7.CrossRefPubMed Rosenberger WF, Hu F. Maximizing power and minimizing treatment failures in clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2004; 1(2):141–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Hu F, Rosenberger WF. Optimality, variability, power: evaluating response-adaptive randomization procedures for treatment comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc. 2003; 98(463):671–8.CrossRef Hu F, Rosenberger WF. Optimality, variability, power: evaluating response-adaptive randomization procedures for treatment comparisons. J Am Stat Assoc. 2003; 98(463):671–8.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Rosenberger WF, Stallard N, Ivanova A, Harper CN, Ricks ML. Optimal adaptive designs for binary response trials. Biometrics. 2001; 57(3):909–13.CrossRefPubMed Rosenberger WF, Stallard N, Ivanova A, Harper CN, Ricks ML. Optimal adaptive designs for binary response trials. Biometrics. 2001; 57(3):909–13.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Zhao W, Durkalski V. Managing competing demands in the implementation of response-adaptive randomization in a large multicenter phase III acute stroke trial. Stat Med. 2014; 33(23):4043–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Zhao W, Durkalski V. Managing competing demands in the implementation of response-adaptive randomization in a large multicenter phase III acute stroke trial. Stat Med. 2014; 33(23):4043–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Connor JT, Elm JJ, Broglio KR, ESETT, Investigators AI, et al. Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages in comparative effectiveness trials: an example in status epilepticus. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66(8):130–7.CrossRef Connor JT, Elm JJ, Broglio KR, ESETT, Investigators AI, et al. Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages in comparative effectiveness trials: an example in status epilepticus. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66(8):130–7.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Yin G, Chen N, Jack Lee J. Phase II trial design with Bayesian adaptive randomization and predictive probability. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2012; 61(2):219–35.CrossRef Yin G, Chen N, Jack Lee J. Phase II trial design with Bayesian adaptive randomization and predictive probability. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2012; 61(2):219–35.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Suarez JI, Tarr RW, Selman WR. Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354(4):387–96.CrossRefPubMed Suarez JI, Tarr RW, Selman WR. Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354(4):387–96.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Dorhout Mees S, Rinkel GJ, Feigin VL, Algra A, van den Bergh WM, Vermeulen M, van Gijn J. Calcium antagonists for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Cochrane Libr. 2007. Issue 3. Art. No:CD000277. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000277.pub3. Dorhout Mees S, Rinkel GJ, Feigin VL, Algra A, van den Bergh WM, Vermeulen M, van Gijn J. Calcium antagonists for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Cochrane Libr. 2007. Issue 3. Art. No:CD000277. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD000277.​pub3.
22.
go back to reference Macdonald RL, Higashida RT, Keller E, Mayer SA, Molyneux A, Raabe A, Vajkoczy P, Wanke I, Bach D, Frey A, et al. Clazosentan, an endothelin receptor antagonist, in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage undergoing surgical clipping: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (CONSCIOUS-2). Lancet Neurology. 2011; 10(7):618–25.CrossRefPubMed Macdonald RL, Higashida RT, Keller E, Mayer SA, Molyneux A, Raabe A, Vajkoczy P, Wanke I, Bach D, Frey A, et al. Clazosentan, an endothelin receptor antagonist, in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage undergoing surgical clipping: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (CONSCIOUS-2). Lancet Neurology. 2011; 10(7):618–25.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Macdonald RL, Higashida RT, Keller E, Mayer SA, Molyneux A, Raabe A, Vajkoczy P, Wanke I, Bach D, Frey A, et al. Randomized trial of clazosentan in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing endovascular coiling. Stroke. 2012; 43(6):1463–9.CrossRefPubMed Macdonald RL, Higashida RT, Keller E, Mayer SA, Molyneux A, Raabe A, Vajkoczy P, Wanke I, Bach D, Frey A, et al. Randomized trial of clazosentan in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage undergoing endovascular coiling. Stroke. 2012; 43(6):1463–9.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Dorhout Mees SM, Algra A, Vandertop WP, van Kooten F, Kuijsten HA, Boiten J, van Oostenbrugge RJ, Salman RA-S, Lavados PM, Rinkel GJ, et al. Magnesium for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (MASH-2): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2012; 380(9836):44–9.CrossRefPubMed Dorhout Mees SM, Algra A, Vandertop WP, van Kooten F, Kuijsten HA, Boiten J, van Oostenbrugge RJ, Salman RA-S, Lavados PM, Rinkel GJ, et al. Magnesium for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (MASH-2): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2012; 380(9836):44–9.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Suarez JI, Martin RH, Calvillo E, Dillon C, Bershad EM, MacDonald RL, Wong J, Harbaugh R. The Albumin in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (ALISAH) multicenter pilot clinical trial safety and neurologic outcomes. Stroke. 2012; 43(3):683–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Suarez JI, Martin RH, Calvillo E, Dillon C, Bershad EM, MacDonald RL, Wong J, Harbaugh R. The Albumin in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (ALISAH) multicenter pilot clinical trial safety and neurologic outcomes. Stroke. 2012; 43(3):683–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Suarez JI, Shannon L, Zaidat OO, Suri MF, Singh G, Lynch G, Selman WR. Effect of human albumin administration on clinical outcome and hospital cost in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg. 2004; 100(4):585–90.CrossRefPubMed Suarez JI, Shannon L, Zaidat OO, Suri MF, Singh G, Lynch G, Selman WR. Effect of human albumin administration on clinical outcome and hospital cost in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg. 2004; 100(4):585–90.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Hill MD, Martin RH, Palesch YY, Tamariz D, Waldman BD, Ryckborst KJ, Moy CS, Barsan WG, Ginsberg MD. The Albumin in Acute Stroke Part 1 trial: an exploratory efficacy analysis. Stroke. 2011; 42(6):1621–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hill MD, Martin RH, Palesch YY, Tamariz D, Waldman BD, Ryckborst KJ, Moy CS, Barsan WG, Ginsberg MD. The Albumin in Acute Stroke Part 1 trial: an exploratory efficacy analysis. Stroke. 2011; 42(6):1621–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Ginsberg MD, Palesch YY, Hill MD, Martin RH, Moy CS, Barsan WG, Waldman BD, Tamariz D, Ryckborst KJ, et al. High-dose albumin treatment for acute ischaemic stroke (ALIAS) Part 2: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurology. 2013; 12(11):1049–1058.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ginsberg MD, Palesch YY, Hill MD, Martin RH, Moy CS, Barsan WG, Waldman BD, Tamariz D, Ryckborst KJ, et al. High-dose albumin treatment for acute ischaemic stroke (ALIAS) Part 2: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurology. 2013; 12(11):1049–1058.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference Hill MD, Martin RH, Palesch YY, Moy CS, Tamariz D, Ryckborst KJ, Jones EB, Weisman D, Pettigrew C, Ginsberg MD. Albumin administration in acute ischemic stroke: safety analysis of the ALIAS Part 2 Multicenter Trial. PloS ONE. 2015; 10(9):0131390.CrossRef Hill MD, Martin RH, Palesch YY, Moy CS, Tamariz D, Ryckborst KJ, Jones EB, Weisman D, Pettigrew C, Ginsberg MD. Albumin administration in acute ischemic stroke: safety analysis of the ALIAS Part 2 Multicenter Trial. PloS ONE. 2015; 10(9):0131390.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Ellerbe C. What information will a statistician need to help me with a sample size calculation?Stroke. 2015; 46(7):159–61.CrossRef Ellerbe C. What information will a statistician need to help me with a sample size calculation?Stroke. 2015; 46(7):159–61.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Dunnett CW. A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J Am Stat Assoc. 1955; 50(272):1096–121.CrossRef Dunnett CW. A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J Am Stat Assoc. 1955; 50(272):1096–121.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Wason J, Trippa L. A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi-stage designs for multi-arm clinical trials. Stat Med. 2014; 33(13):2206–21.CrossRefPubMed Wason J, Trippa L. A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi-stage designs for multi-arm clinical trials. Stat Med. 2014; 33(13):2206–21.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Bauer P, Koenig F, Brannath W, Posch M. Selection and bias—two hostile brothers. Stat Med. 2010; 29(1):1–13.PubMed Bauer P, Koenig F, Brannath W, Posch M. Selection and bias—two hostile brothers. Stat Med. 2010; 29(1):1–13.PubMed
34.
go back to reference Liu Q, Proschan MA, Pledger GW. A unified theory of two-stage adaptive designs. J Am Stat Assoc. 2012; 97(460):1034–41.CrossRef Liu Q, Proschan MA, Pledger GW. A unified theory of two-stage adaptive designs. J Am Stat Assoc. 2012; 97(460):1034–41.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Palesch YY. Some common misperceptions about P values. Stroke. 2014; 45(12):244–6.CrossRef Palesch YY. Some common misperceptions about P values. Stroke. 2014; 45(12):244–6.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA. The ASA’s statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. Am Stat. 2016; 70(2):129–33.CrossRef Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA. The ASA’s statement on p-values: context, process, and purpose. Am Stat. 2016; 70(2):129–33.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Bayesian dose selection design for a binary outcome using restricted response adaptive randomization
Authors
Caitlyn Meinzer
Renee Martin
Jose I. Suarez
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2004-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Trials 1/2017 Go to the issue