Search

The trace plot is seldom used in meta-analysis, yet it is a very informative plot. In this article, we define and illustrate what the trace plot is, and discuss why it is important. The Bayesian version of the plot combines the posterior density of τ , the between-study standard deviation, and the shrunken estimates of the study effects as a function of τ . With a small or moderate number of studies, τ is not estimated with much precision, and parameter estimates and shrunken study effect estimates can vary widely depending on the correct value of τ . The trace plot allows visualization of the sensitivity to τ along with a plot that shows which values of τ are plausible and which are implausible. A comparable frequentist or empirical Bayes version provides similar results. The concepts are illustrated using examples in meta-analysis and meta-regression; implementation in R is facilitated in a Bayesian or frequentist framework using the bayesmeta and metafor packages, respectively., (© 2023 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Many late-phase clinical trials recruit subjects at multiple study sites. This introduces a hierarchical structure into the data that can result in a power-loss compared to a more homogeneous single-center trial. Building on a recently proposed approach to sample size determination, we suggest a sample size recalculation procedure for multicenter trials with continuous endpoints. The procedure estimates nuisance parameters at interim from noncomparative data and recalculates the sample size required based on these estimates. In contrast to other sample size calculation methods for multicenter trials, our approach assumes a mixed effects model and does not rely on balanced data within centers. It is therefore advantageous, especially for sample size recalculation at interim. We illustrate the proposed methodology by a study evaluating a diabetes management system. Monte Carlo simulations are carried out to evaluate operation characteristics of the sample size recalculation procedure using comparative as well as noncomparative data, assessing their dependence on parameters such as between-center heterogeneity, residual variance of observations, treatment effect size and number of centers. We compare two different estimators for between-center heterogeneity, an unadjusted and a bias-adjusted estimator, both based on quadratic forms. The type 1 error probability as well as statistical power are close to their nominal levels for all parameter combinations considered in our simulation study for the proposed unadjusted estimator, whereas the adjusted estimator exhibits some type 1 error rate inflation. Overall, the sample size recalculation procedure can be recommended to mitigate risks arising from misspecified nuisance parameters at the planning stage., (© 2020 The Authors. Biometrical Journal published by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)

Importance: Interpreting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their clinical relevance is challenging when P values are either marginally above or below the P = .05 threshold., Objective: To use the concept of reverse fragility index (RFI) to provide a measure of confidence in the neutrality of RCT results when assessed from the clinical perspective., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, a MEDLINE search was conducted for RCTs published from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018, in JAMA, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), and The Lancet. Eligible studies were phase 3 and 4 trials with 1:1 randomization and statistically nonsignificant binary primary end points. Data analysis was performed from August 1, 2019, to August 31, 2019., Exposures: Single vs multicenter enrollment, total number of events, private vs government funding, placebo vs active control, and time to event vs frequency data., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the median RFI with interquartile range (IQR) at the P = .05 threshold. Secondary outcomes were the number of RCTs in which the number of participants lost to follow-up was greater than the RFI; the median RFI with IQR at different P value thresholds; the median reverse fragility quotient with IQR; and the correlation between sample sizes, number of events, and P values of the RCT and RFI., Results: Of the 167 RCTs included, 76 (46%) were published in the NEJM, 50 (30%) in JAMA, and 41 (24%) in The Lancet. The median (IQR) sample size was 970 (470-3427) participants, and the median (IQR) number of events was 251 (105-570). The median (IQR) RFI at the P = .05 threshold was 8 (5-13). Fifty-seven RCTs (34%) had an RFI of 5 or lower, and in 68 RCTs (41%) the number of participants lost to follow-up was greater than the RFI. Trials with P values ranging from P = .06 to P = .10 had a median (IQR) RFI of 3 (2-4). When compared, median (IQR) RFIs were not statistically significant for single-center vs multicenter enrollment (5 [4-13] vs 8 [5-13]; P = .41), private vs government-funded studies (9 [5-13] vs 8 [5-13]; P = .34), and time-to-event primary end points vs frequency data (9 [5-14] vs 7 [4-13]; P = .43). The median (IQR) RFI at the P = .01 threshold was 12 (7-19) and at the P = .005 threshold was 14 (9-21)., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that a relatively small number of events (median of 8) had to change to move the primary end point of an RCT from nonsignificant to statistically significant. These findings emphasize the nuance required when interpreting trial results that did not meet prespecified significance thresholds.

In randomized clinical trials, it is standard to include baseline variables in the primary analysis as covariates, as it is recommended by international guidelines. For the study design to be consistent with the analysis, these variables should also be taken into account when calculating the sample size to appropriately power the trial. Because assumptions made in the sample size calculation are always subject to some degree of uncertainty, a blinded sample size reestimation (BSSR) is recommended to adjust the sample size when necessary. In this article, we introduce a BSSR approach for count data outcomes with baseline covariates. Count outcomes are common in clinical trials and examples include the number of exacerbations in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, relapses, and scan lesions in multiple sclerosis and seizures in epilepsy. The introduced methods are based on Wald and likelihood ratio test statistics. The approaches are illustrated by a clinical trial in epilepsy. The BSSR procedures proposed are compared in a Monte Carlo simulation study and shown to yield power values close to the target while not inflating the type I error rate., (© 2020 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Meta-analytic methods may be used to combine evidence from different sources of information. Quite commonly, the normal-normal hierarchical model (NNHM) including a random-effect to account for between-study heterogeneity is utilized for such analyses. The same modeling framework may also be used to not only derive a combined estimate, but also to borrow strength for a particular study from another by deriving a shrinkage estimate . For instance, a small-scale randomized controlled trial could be supported by a non-randomized study, e.g. a clinical registry. This would be particularly attractive in the context of rare diseases. We demonstrate that a meta-analysis still makes sense in this extreme case, effectively based on a synthesis of only two studies, as illustrated using a recent trial and a clinical registry in Creutzfeld-Jakob disease. Derivation of a shrinkage estimate within a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis may substantially improve a given estimate even based on only a single additional estimate while accounting for potential effect heterogeneity between the studies. Alternatively, inference may equivalently be motivated via a model specification that does not require a common overall mean parameter but considers the treatment effect in one study, and the difference in effects between the studies. The proposed approach is quite generally applicable to combine different types of evidence originating, e.g. from meta-analyses or individual studies. An application of this more general setup is provided in immunosuppression following liver transplantation in children.

With advancement of technologies such as genomic sequencing, predictive biomarkers have become a useful tool for the development of personalized medicine. Predictive biomarkers can be used to select subsets of patients, which are most likely to benefit from a treatment. A number of approaches for subgroup identification were proposed over the last years. Although overviews of subgroup identification methods are available, systematic comparisons of their performance in simulation studies are rare. Interaction trees (IT), model-based recursive partitioning, subgroup identification based on differential effect, simultaneous threshold interaction modeling algorithm (STIMA), and adaptive refinement by directed peeling were proposed for subgroup identification. We compared these methods in a simulation study using a structured approach. In order to identify a target population for subsequent trials, a selection of the identified subgroups is needed. Therefore, we propose a subgroup criterion leading to a target subgroup consisting of the identified subgroups with an estimated treatment difference no less than a pre-specified threshold. In our simulation study, we evaluated these methods by considering measures for binary classification, like sensitivity and specificity. In settings with large effects or huge sample sizes, most methods perform well. For more realistic settings in drug development involving data from a single trial only, however, none of the methods seems suitable for selecting a target population. Using the subgroup criterion as alternative to the proposed pruning procedures, STIMA and IT can improve their performance in some settings. The methods and the subgroup criterion are illustrated by an application in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis., (© 2019 The Authors Pharmaceutical Statistics Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Robust semiparametric models for recurrent events have received increasing attention in the analysis of clinical trials in a variety of diseases including chronic heart failure. In comparison to parametric recurrent event models, robust semiparametric models are more flexible in that neither the baseline event rate nor the process inducing between-patient heterogeneity needs to be specified in terms of a specific parametric statistical model. However, implementing group sequential designs in the robust semiparametric model is complicated by the fact that the sequence of Wald statistics does not follow asymptotically the canonical joint distribution. In this manuscript, we propose two types of group sequential procedures for a robust semiparametric analysis of recurrent events. The first group sequential procedure is based on the asymptotic covariance of the sequence of Wald statistics and it guarantees asymptotic control of the type I error rate. The second procedure is based on the canonical joint distribution and does not guarantee asymptotic type I error rate control but is easy to implement and corresponds to the well-known standard approach for group sequential designs. Moreover, we describe how to determine the maximum information when planning a clinical trial with a group sequential design and a robust semiparametric analysis of recurrent events. We contrast the operating characteristics of the proposed group sequential procedures in a simulation study motivated by the ongoing phase 3 PARAGON-HF trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01920711) in more than 4600 patients with chronic heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction. We found that both group sequential procedures have similar operating characteristics and that for some practically relevant scenarios, the group sequential procedure based on the canonical joint distribution has advantages with respect to the control of the type I error rate. The proposed method for calculating the maximum information results in appropriately powered trials for both procedures.

Adaptive enrichment designs offer an efficient and flexible way to demonstrate the efficacy of a treatment in a clinically defined full population or in, eg, biomarker-defined subpopulations while controlling the family-wise Type I error rate in the strong sense. Frequently used testing strategies in designs with two or more stages include the combination test and the conditional error function approach. Here, we focus on the latter and present some extensions. In contrast to previous work, we allow for multiple subgroups rather than one subgroup only. For nested as well as nonoverlapping subgroups with normally distributed endpoints, we explore the effect of estimating the variances in the subpopulations. Instead of using a normal approximation, we derive new t-distribution-based methods for two different scenarios. First, in the case of equal variances across the subpopulations, we present exact results using a multivariate t-distribution. Second, in the case of potentially varying variances across subgroups, we provide some improved approximations compared to the normal approximation. The performance of the proposed conditional error function approaches is assessed and compared to the combination test in a simulation study. The proposed methods are motivated by an example in pulmonary arterial hypertension., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Extrapolation from a source to a target, eg, from adults to children, is a promising approach to utilize external information when data are sparse. In the context of meta-analyses, one is commonly faced with a small number of studies, whereas potentially relevant additional information may also be available. Here, we describe a simple extrapolation strategy using heavy-tailed mixture priors for effect estimation in meta-analysis, which effectively results in a model-averaging technique. The described method is robust in the sense that a potential prior-data conflict, ie, a discrepancy between source and target data, is explicitly anticipated. The aim of this paper is to develop a solution for this particular application to showcase the ease of implementation by providing R code, and to demonstrate the robustness of the general approach in simulations., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

We consider modelling and inference as well as sample size estimation and reestimation for clinical trials with longitudinal count data as outcomes. Our approach is general but is rooted in design and analysis of multiple sclerosis trials where lesion counts obtained by magnetic resonance imaging are important endpoints. We adopt a binomial thinning model that allows for correlated counts with marginal Poisson or negative binomial distributions. Methods for sample size planning and blinded sample size reestimation for randomised controlled clinical trials with such outcomes are developed. The models and approaches are applicable to data with incomplete observations. A simulation study is conducted to assess the effectiveness of sample size estimation and blinded sample size reestimation methods. Sample sizes attained through these procedures are shown to maintain the desired study power without inflating the type I error. Data from a recent trial in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis illustrate the modelling approach.

Prior information is often incorporated informally when planning a clinical trial. Here, we present an approach on how to incorporate prior information, such as data from historical clinical trials, into the nuisance parameter-based sample size re-estimation in a design with an internal pilot study. We focus on trials with continuous endpoints in which the outcome variance is the nuisance parameter. For planning and analyzing the trial, frequentist methods are considered. Moreover, the external information on the variance is summarized by the Bayesian meta-analytic-predictive approach. To incorporate external information into the sample size re-estimation, we propose to update the meta-analytic-predictive prior based on the results of the internal pilot study and to re-estimate the sample size using an estimator from the posterior. By means of a simulation study, we compare the operating characteristics such as power and sample size distribution of the proposed procedure with the traditional sample size re-estimation approach that uses the pooled variance estimator. The simulation study shows that, if no prior-data conflict is present, incorporating external information into the sample size re-estimation improves the operating characteristics compared to the traditional approach. In the case of a prior-data conflict, that is, when the variance of the ongoing clinical trial is unequal to the prior location, the performance of the traditional sample size re-estimation procedure is in general superior, even when the prior information is robustified. When considering to include prior information in sample size re-estimation, the potential gains should be balanced against the risks., (Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

In this article, we study blinded sample size re-estimation in the 'gold standard' design with internal pilot study for normally distributed outcomes. The 'gold standard' design is a three-arm clinical trial design that includes an active and a placebo control in addition to an experimental treatment. We focus on the absolute margin approach to hypothesis testing in three-arm trials at which the non-inferiority of the experimental treatment and the assay sensitivity are assessed by pairwise comparisons. We compare several blinded sample size re-estimation procedures in a simulation study assessing operating characteristics including power and type I error. We find that sample size re-estimation based on the popular one-sample variance estimator results in overpowered trials. Moreover, sample size re-estimation based on unbiased variance estimators such as the Xing-Ganju variance estimator results in underpowered trials, as it is expected because an overestimation of the variance and thus the sample size is in general required for the re-estimation procedure to eventually meet the target power. To overcome this problem, we propose an inflation factor for the sample size re-estimation with the Xing-Ganju variance estimator and show that this approach results in adequately powered trials. Because of favorable features of the Xing-Ganju variance estimator such as unbiasedness and a distribution independent of the group means, the inflation factor does not depend on the nuisance parameter and, therefore, can be calculated prior to a trial. Moreover, we prove that the sample size re-estimation based on the Xing-Ganju variance estimator does not bias the effect estimate. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., (Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Random-effects meta-analyses are used to combine evidence of treatment effects from multiple studies. Since treatment effects may vary across trials due to differences in study characteristics, heterogeneity in treatment effects between studies must be accounted for to achieve valid inference. The standard model for random-effects meta-analysis assumes approximately normal effect estimates and a normal random-effects model. However, standard methods based on this model ignore the uncertainty in estimating the between-trial heterogeneity. In the special setting of only two studies and in the presence of heterogeneity, we investigate here alternatives such as the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method (HKSJ), the modified Knapp-Hartung method (mKH, a variation of the HKSJ method) and Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses with priors covering plausible heterogeneity values; R code to reproduce the examples is presented in an appendix. The properties of these methods are assessed by applying them to five examples from various rare diseases and by a simulation study. Whereas the standard method based on normal quantiles has poor coverage, the HKSJ and mKH generally lead to very long, and therefore inconclusive, confidence intervals. The Bayesian intervals on the whole show satisfying properties and offer a reasonable compromise between these two extremes., (© 2016 The Authors. Biometrical Journal published by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)

Regulatory authorities require that the sample size of a confirmatory trial is calculated prior to the start of the trial. However, the sample size quite often depends on parameters that might not be known in advance of the study. Misspecification of these parameters can lead to under- or overestimation of the sample size. Both situations are unfavourable as the first one decreases the power and the latter one leads to a waste of resources. Hence, designs have been suggested that allow a re-assessment of the sample size in an ongoing trial. These methods usually focus on estimating the variance. However, for some methods the performance depends not only on the variance but also on the correlation between measurements. We develop and compare different methods for blinded estimation of the correlation coefficient that are less likely to introduce operational bias when the blinding is maintained. Their performance with respect to bias and standard error is compared to the unblinded estimator. We simulated two different settings: one assuming that all group means are the same and one assuming that different groups have different means. Simulation results show that the naïve (one-sample) estimator is only slightly biased and has a standard error comparable to that of the unblinded estimator. However, if the group means differ, other estimators have better performance depending on the sample size per group and the number of groups., (© 2016 The Authors. Biometrical Journal Published by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)

Objectives: Methods for change point (also sometimes referred to as threshold or breakpoint) detection in binary sequences are not new and were introduced as early as 1955. Much of the research in this area has focussed on asymptotic and exact conditional methods. Here we develop an exact unconditional test., Methods: An unconditional exact test is developed which assumes the total number of events as random instead of conditioning on the number of observed events. The new test is shown to be uniformly more powerful than Worsley's exact conditional test and means for its efficient numerical calculations are given. Adaptions of methods by Berger and Boos are made to deal with the issue that the unknown event probability imposes a nuisance parameter. The methods are compared in a Monte Carlo simulation study and applied to a cohort of patients undergoing traumatic orthopaedic surgery involving external fixators where a change in pin site infections is investigated., Results: The unconditional test controls the type I error rate at the nominal level and is uniformly more powerful than (or to be more precise uniformly at least as powerful as) Worsley's exact conditional test which is very conservative for small sample sizes. In the application a beneficial effect associated with the introduction of a new treatment procedure for pin site care could be revealed., Conclusions: We consider the new test an effective and easy to use exact test which is recommended in small sample size change point problems in binary sequences.

A three-arm clinical trial design with an experimental treatment, an active control, and a placebo control, commonly referred to as the gold standard design, enables testing of non-inferiority or superiority of the experimental treatment compared with the active control. In this paper, we propose methods for designing and analyzing three-arm trials with negative binomially distributed endpoints. In particular, we develop a Wald-type test with a restricted maximum-likelihood variance estimator for testing non-inferiority or superiority. For this test, sample size and power formulas as well as optimal sample size allocations will be derived. The performance of the proposed test will be assessed in an extensive simulation study with regard to type I error rate, power, sample size, and sample size allocation. For the purpose of comparison, Wald-type statistics with a sample variance estimator and an unrestricted maximum-likelihood estimator are included in the simulation study. We found that the proposed Wald-type test with a restricted variance estimator performed well across the considered scenarios and is therefore recommended for application in clinical trials. The methods proposed are motivated and illustrated by a recent clinical trial in multiple sclerosis. The R package ThreeArmedTrials, which implements the methods discussed in this paper, is available on CRAN., (Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The analysis of count data is commonly done using Poisson models. Negative binomial models are a straightforward and readily motivated generalization for the case of overdispersed data, that is, when the observed variance is greater than expected under a Poissonian model. Rate and overdispersion parameters then need to be considered jointly, which in general is not trivial. Here, we are concerned with evidence synthesis in the case where the reporting of data is rather heterogeneous, that is, events are reported either in terms of mean event counts, the proportion of event-free patients, or rate estimates and standard errors. Either figure carries some information about the relevant parameters, and it is the joint modeling that allows for coherent inference on the parameters of interest. The methods are motivated and illustrated by a systematic review in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease., (© 2015 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)

Background: Random-effects meta-analysis is commonly performed by first deriving an estimate of the between-study variation, the heterogeneity, and subsequently using this as the basis for combining results, i.e., for estimating the effect, the figure of primary interest. The heterogeneity variance estimate however is commonly associated with substantial uncertainty, especially in contexts where there are only few studies available, such as in small populations and rare diseases., Methods: Confidence intervals and tests for the effect may be constructed via a simple normal approximation, or via a Student-t distribution, using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) approach, which additionally uses a refined estimator of variance of the effect estimator. The modified Knapp-Hartung method (mKH) applies an ad hoc correction and has been proposed to prevent counterintuitive effects and to yield more conservative inference. We performed a simulation study to investigate the behaviour of the standard HKSJ and modified mKH procedures in a range of circumstances, with a focus on the common case of meta-analysis based on only a few studies., Results: The standard HKSJ procedure works well when the treatment effect estimates to be combined are of comparable precision, but nominal error levels are exceeded when standard errors vary considerably between studies (e.g. due to variations in study size). Application of the modification on the other hand yields more conservative results with error rates closer to the nominal level. Differences are most pronounced in the common case of few studies of varying size or precision., Conclusions: Use of the modified mKH procedure is recommended, especially when only a few studies contribute to the meta-analysis and the involved studies' precisions (standard errors) vary.

In an adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trial interim analysis, data are used for treatment selection, enabling resources to be focused on comparison of more effective treatment(s) with a control. In this paper, we compare two methods recently proposed to enable use of short-term endpoint data for decision-making at the interim analysis. The comparison focuses on the power and the probability of correctly identifying the most promising treatment. We show that the choice of method depends on how well short-term data predict the best treatment, which may be measured by the correlation between treatment effects on short- and long-term endpoints.

The use of an internal pilot study for blinded sample size re-estimation (BSSR) allows to reduce uncertainty on the appropriate sample size compared with conventional fixed sample size designs. Recently BSSR procedures for recurrent event data were proposed and investigated. These approaches assume treatment-specific constant event rates that might not always be appropriate as found in relapsing multiple sclerosis. On the basis of a proportional intensity frailty model, we propose methods for BSSR in situations where a time trend of the event rates is present. For the sample size planning and the final analysis standard negative binomial methods can be used, as long as the patient follow-up time is approximately equal in the treatment groups. To re-estimate the sample size at interim, however, a full likelihood analysis is necessary. Operating characteristics such as rejection probabilities and sample size distribution are evaluated in a simulation study motivated by a systematic review in relapsing multiple sclerosis. The key factors affecting the operating characteristics are the study duration and the length of the recruitment period. The proposed procedure for BSSR controls the type I error rate and maintains the desired power against misspecifications of the nuisance parameters., (Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Counts of events are increasingly common as primary endpoints in randomized clinical trials. With between-patient heterogeneity leading to variances in excess of the mean (referred to as overdispersion), statistical models reflecting this heterogeneity by mixtures of Poisson distributions are frequently employed. Sample size calculation in the planning of such trials requires knowledge on the nuisance parameters, that is, the control (or overall) event rate and the overdispersion parameter. Usually, there is only little prior knowledge regarding these parameters in the design phase resulting in considerable uncertainty regarding the sample size. In this situation internal pilot studies have been found very useful and very recently several blinded procedures for sample size re-estimation have been proposed for overdispersed count data, one of which is based on an EM-algorithm. In this paper we investigate the EM-algorithm based procedure with respect to aspects of their implementation by studying the algorithm's dependence on the choice of convergence criterion and find that the procedure is sensitive to the choice of the stopping criterion in scenarios relevant to clinical practice. We also compare the EM-based procedure to other competing procedures regarding their operating characteristics such as sample size distribution and power. Furthermore, the robustness of these procedures to deviations from the model assumptions is explored. We find that some of the procedures are robust to at least moderate deviations. The results are illustrated using data from the US National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute sponsored Asymptomatic Cardiac Ischemia Pilot study., (Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The clinical trial design including a test treatment, an active control and a placebo is called the gold standard design. In this paper, we develop a statistical method for planning and evaluating non-inferiority trials with gold standard design for right-censored time-to-event data. We consider both lost to follow-up and administrative censoring. We present a semiparametric approach that only assumes the proportionality of the hazard functions. In particular, we develop an algorithm for calculating the minimal total sample size and its optimal allocation to treatment groups such that a desired power can be attained for a specific parameter constellation under the alternative. For the purpose of sample size calculation, we assume the endpoints to be Weibull distributed. By means of simulations, we investigate the actual type I error rate, power and the accuracy of the calculated sample sizes. Finally, we compare our procedure with a previously proposed procedure assuming exponentially distributed event times. To illustrate our method, we consider a double-blinded, randomized, active and placebo controlled trial in major depression., (Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

In recent years adaptive seamless phase II/III designs (ASDs) allowing treatment or dose selection at an interim analysis have gained much attention because of their potential to save development costs and to shorten time-to-market of a new compound compared to conventional drug development programmes with separate trials for individual phases. In this paper, we describe an ASD with treatment selection based on early outcome data, specifically considering the situation where no final outcomes are observed at the time of the interim analysis. Bringing together combination tests for adaptive designs and the closure principle for multiple testing, control of the familywise type I error rate in the strong sense is achieved. Furthermore, a simulation model is proposed based on standardized test statistics that allows the generation of virtual trials for a variety of outcomes. We use this simulation model to investigate the actual type I error rate of the proposed testing procedure and find that the familywise type I error rate is controlled as expected. The method is often conservative, with the degree of conservatism depending on the correlation between early and late outcome, the true mean values of the early outcome in the different treatment groups and the selection rule. The investigations are motivated and illustrated by an application of the proposed design and simulation model to progressive multiple sclerosis., (Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objectives: Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is widely applied in practice and its use is recommended by regulatory guidelines. However, the required sample size for ANCOVA depends on parameters that are usually uncertain in the planning phase of a study. Sample size recalculation within the internal pilot study design allows to cope with this problem. From a regulatory viewpoint it is preferable that the treatment group allocation remains masked and that the type I error is controlled at the specified significance level. The characteristics of blinded sample size reassessment for ANCOVA in non-inferiority studies have not been investigated yet. We propose an appropriate method and evaluate its performance., Methods: In a simulation study, the characteristics of the proposed method with respect to type I error rate, power and sample size are investigated. It is illustrated by a clinical trial example how strict control of the significance level can be achieved., Results: A slight excess of the type I error rate beyond the nominal significance level was observed. The extent of exceedance increases with increasing non-inferiority margin and increasing correlation between outcome and covariate. The procedure assures the desired power over a wide range of scenarios even if nuisance parameters affecting the sample size are initially mis-specified., Conclusions: The proposed blinded sample size recalculation procedure protects from insufficient sample sizes due to incorrect assumptions about nuisance parameters in the planning phase. The original procedure may lead to an elevated type I error rate, but methods are available to control the nominal significance level.

When planning a clinical trial the sample size calculation is commonly based on an a priori estimate of the variance of the outcome variable. Misspecification of the variance can have substantial impact on the power of the trial. It is therefore attractive to update the planning assumptions during the ongoing trial using an internal estimate of the variance. For this purpose, an EM algorithm based procedure for blinded variance estimation was proposed for normally distributed data. Various simulation studies suggest a number of appealing properties of this procedure. In contrast, we show that (i) the estimates provided by this procedure depend on the initialization, (ii) the stopping rule used is inadequate to guarantee that the algorithm converges against the maximum likelihood estimator, and (iii) the procedure corresponds to the special case of simple randomization which, however, in clinical trials is rarely applied. Further, we show that maximum likelihood estimation leads to no reasonable results for blinded sample size re-estimation due to bias and high variability. The problem is illustrated by a clinical trial in asthma., (Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

In clinical trials of antidepressant treatments, a depression rating score is usually measured at several points of time for each patient. We propose an approach to fit data from this type of clinical trial using an exponential mixed-effects model. Compared to previous proposals, this approach has the advantage that individual recovery curves are fitted rather than curves of means. Furthermore, no artificial fixing of model parameters is needed as in other approaches. The flexibility of the proposed model is shown for various situations. The approach is illustrated by an example from a placebo-controlled study for the treatment of depression with St. John's Wort (Hypericum perforatum).