Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

Re-formulating Gehan’s design as a flexible two-stage single-arm trial

Authors: Michael J. Grayling, Adrian P. Mander

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Gehan’s two-stage design was historically the design of choice for phase II oncology trials. One of the reasons it is less frequently used today is that it does not allow for a formal test of treatment efficacy, and therefore does not control conventional type-I and type-II error-rates.

Methods

We describe how recently developed methodology for flexible two-stage single-arm trials can be used to incorporate the hypothesis test commonly associated with phase II trials in to Gehan’s design. We additionally detail how this hypothesis test can be optimised in order to maximise its power, and describe how the second stage sample sizes can be chosen to more readily provide the operating characteristics that were originally envisioned by Gehan. Finally, we contrast our modified Gehan designs to Simon’s designs, based on two examples motivated by real clinical trials.

Results

Gehan’s original designs are often greatly under- or over-powered when compared to type-II error-rates typically used in phase II. However, we demonstrate that the control parameters of his design can be chosen to resolve this problem. With this, though, the modified Gehan designs have operating characteristics similar to the more familiar Simon designs.

Conclusions

The trial design settings in which Gehan’s design will be preferable over Simon’s designs are likely limited. Provided the second stage sample sizes are chosen carefully, however, one scenario of potential utility is when the trial’s primary goal is to ascertain the treatment response rate to a certain precision.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gehan E. The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chronic Dis. 1961; 13(4):346–53.CrossRef Gehan E. The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chronic Dis. 1961; 13(4):346–53.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Rubinstein L. Phase II design: History and evolution. Chin Clin Oncol. 2014; 3(4):48.PubMed Rubinstein L. Phase II design: History and evolution. Chin Clin Oncol. 2014; 3(4):48.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Simon R. Optimal Two-Stage Designs for Phase II Clinical Trials. Control Clin Trials. 1989; 10(1):1–10.CrossRef Simon R. Optimal Two-Stage Designs for Phase II Clinical Trials. Control Clin Trials. 1989; 10(1):1–10.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Grayling MJ, Mander AP. Do single-arm trials have a role in drug development plans incorporating randomised trials?Pharm Stat. 2016; 15(2):143–51.CrossRef Grayling MJ, Mander AP. Do single-arm trials have a role in drug development plans incorporating randomised trials?Pharm Stat. 2016; 15(2):143–51.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Ivanova A, Paul B, Marchenko O, Song G, Patel N, Moschos S. Nine-year change in statistical design, profile, and success rates of phase II oncology trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2016; 26(1):141–9.CrossRef Ivanova A, Paul B, Marchenko O, Song G, Patel N, Moschos S. Nine-year change in statistical design, profile, and success rates of phase II oncology trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2016; 26(1):141–9.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Langrand-Escure J, Rivoirard R, Oriol M, Tinquaut F, Chauvin F, Magne N, Bourmaud A. Quality of reporting in oncology phase II trials: A 5-year assessment through systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2017; 12(12):0185536.CrossRef Langrand-Escure J, Rivoirard R, Oriol M, Tinquaut F, Chauvin F, Magne N, Bourmaud A. Quality of reporting in oncology phase II trials: A 5-year assessment through systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2017; 12(12):0185536.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Englert S, Kieser M. Improving the flexibility and efficiency of phase II designs for oncology trials. Biometrics. 2012; 68(3):886–92.CrossRef Englert S, Kieser M. Improving the flexibility and efficiency of phase II designs for oncology trials. Biometrics. 2012; 68(3):886–92.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Englert S, Kieser M. Optimal adaptive two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Biom J. 2013; 55(6):955–68.CrossRef Englert S, Kieser M. Optimal adaptive two-stage designs for phase II cancer clinical trials. Biom J. 2013; 55(6):955–68.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Shan G, Wilding GE, Hutson AD, Gerstenberger S. Optimal adaptive two-stage designs for early phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 2016; 35(8):1257–66.CrossRef Shan G, Wilding GE, Hutson AD, Gerstenberger S. Optimal adaptive two-stage designs for early phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 2016; 35(8):1257–66.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kunzmann K, Kieser M. Point estimation and p-values in phase II adaptive two-stage designs with a binary endpoint. Stat Med. 2017; 36(6):971–84.CrossRef Kunzmann K, Kieser M. Point estimation and p-values in phase II adaptive two-stage designs with a binary endpoint. Stat Med. 2017; 36(6):971–84.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kunzmann K, Kieser M. Test-compatible confidence intervals for adaptive two-stage single-arm designs with binary endpoint. Biom J. 2018; 60(1):196–206.CrossRef Kunzmann K, Kieser M. Test-compatible confidence intervals for adaptive two-stage single-arm designs with binary endpoint. Biom J. 2018; 60(1):196–206.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Schmucker C, Schell L, Portalupi S, Oeller P, Cabrera L, Bassler D, Schwarzer G, Scherer R, Antes G, von Elm E, Meerpohl J, on behalf of the OPEN consortium. Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(12):1–25.CrossRef Schmucker C, Schell L, Portalupi S, Oeller P, Cabrera L, Bassler D, Schwarzer G, Scherer R, Antes G, von Elm E, Meerpohl J, on behalf of the OPEN consortium. Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(12):1–25.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Gan HK, Grothey A, Pond GR, Moore J, Siu LL, Sargent D. Randomized phase II trials: Inevitable or inadvisable?J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(15):2641–7.CrossRef Gan HK, Grothey A, Pond GR, Moore J, Siu LL, Sargent D. Randomized phase II trials: Inevitable or inadvisable?J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(15):2641–7.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Clopper C, Pearson E. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika. 1934; 26(4):404–13.CrossRef Clopper C, Pearson E. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika. 1934; 26(4):404–13.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Dupuis-Girod S, Ginon I, Saurin J, Marion D, Guillot E, Decullier E, Roux A, Carette M, Gilbert-Dussardier B, Hatron P, Lacombe P, Lorcerie B, Rivière S, Corre R, Giraud S, Bailly S, Paintaud G, Ternant D, Valette P, Plauchu H, Faure F. Bevacizumab in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia and severe hepatic vascular malformations and high cardiac output. JAMA. 2012; 307(9):948–55.CrossRef Dupuis-Girod S, Ginon I, Saurin J, Marion D, Guillot E, Decullier E, Roux A, Carette M, Gilbert-Dussardier B, Hatron P, Lacombe P, Lorcerie B, Rivière S, Corre R, Giraud S, Bailly S, Paintaud G, Ternant D, Valette P, Plauchu H, Faure F. Bevacizumab in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia and severe hepatic vascular malformations and high cardiac output. JAMA. 2012; 307(9):948–55.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Lorenzen S, Brücher B, Zimmermann F, Geinitz H, Riera J, Schuster T, Roethling N, Höfler H, Ott K, Peschel C, Siewert J, Molls M, Lordic F. Neoadjuvant continuous infusion of weekly 5-fluorouracil and escalating doses of oxaliplatin plus concurrent radiation in locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Results of a phase I/II trial. Br J Cancer. 2008; 99(7):1020–6.CrossRef Lorenzen S, Brücher B, Zimmermann F, Geinitz H, Riera J, Schuster T, Roethling N, Höfler H, Ott K, Peschel C, Siewert J, Molls M, Lordic F. Neoadjuvant continuous infusion of weekly 5-fluorouracil and escalating doses of oxaliplatin plus concurrent radiation in locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Results of a phase I/II trial. Br J Cancer. 2008; 99(7):1020–6.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Pepe MS1, Feng Z, Longton G, Koopmeiners J. Conditional estimation of sensitivity and specificity from a phase 2 biomarker study allowing early termination for futility. Stat Med. 2009; 28(5):762–79.CrossRef Pepe MS1, Feng Z, Longton G, Koopmeiners J. Conditional estimation of sensitivity and specificity from a phase 2 biomarker study allowing early termination for futility. Stat Med. 2009; 28(5):762–79.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Kramar A, Potvin D, Hill C. Multistage designs for phase ii clinical trials: statistical issues in cancer research. Br J Cancer. 1996; 74:1317–20.CrossRef Kramar A, Potvin D, Hill C. Multistage designs for phase ii clinical trials: statistical issues in cancer research. Br J Cancer. 1996; 74:1317–20.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Goffin J, Pond G, Tu D. A comparison of a new multinomial stopping rule with stopping rules of fleming and gehan in single arm phase ii cancer clinical trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011; 11:95.CrossRef Goffin J, Pond G, Tu D. A comparison of a new multinomial stopping rule with stopping rules of fleming and gehan in single arm phase ii cancer clinical trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011; 11:95.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Chen S, Soong S, Wheeler R. An efficient multiple-stage procedure for phase ii clinical trials that have high response rate objectives. Control Clin Trials. 1994; 15(4):277–83.CrossRef Chen S, Soong S, Wheeler R. An efficient multiple-stage procedure for phase ii clinical trials that have high response rate objectives. Control Clin Trials. 1994; 15(4):277–83.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Re-formulating Gehan’s design as a flexible two-stage single-arm trial
Authors
Michael J. Grayling
Adrian P. Mander
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0659-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019 Go to the issue