Exact confidence limits for the response rate in two-stage designs with over- or under-enrollment in the second stage

Abstract

Simon’s two-stage design has been widely used in early phase clinical trials to assess the activity of a new investigated treatment. In practice, the actual sample sizes do not always follow the study design precisely, especially in the second stage. When over- or under-enrollment occurs in a study, the original critical values for the study design are no longer valid for making proper statistical inference in a clinical trial. The hypothesis for such studies is always one-sided, and the null hypothesis is rejected when only a few responses are observed. Therefore, a one-sided lower interval is suitable to test the hypothesis. The commonly used approaches for confidence interval construction are based on asymptotic approaches. These approaches generally do not guarantee the coverage probability. For this reason, Clopper-Pearson approach can be used to compute exact confidence intervals. This approach has to be used in conjunction with a method to order the sample space. The frequently used method is based on point estimates for the response rate, but this ordering has too many ties which lead to conservativeness of the exact intervals. We propose developing exact one-sided intervals based on the p-value to order the sample space. The proposed approach outperforms the existing asymptotic and exact approaches. Therefore, it is recommended for use in practice.

Keywords

Clopper-Pearson approach coverage probability exact one-sided interval two-stage design

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Simon

. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 1–10.

Jung

SHH

Kim

. On the estimation of the binomial probability in multistage clinical trials. Stat Med 2004; 23: 881–896.

Raphaël

Kristell

. What inference for two-stage phase II trials? BMC Med Res Methodol 2012; 12: 117–117.

Koyama

Chen

. Proper inference from Simon’s two-stage designs. Stat Med 2008; 27: 3145–3154.

Zhao

Xi-Ping

. Statistical inference for extended or shortened phase II studies based on Simon’s two-stage designs. BMC Med Res Methodol 2015; 15: 48–48.

Clopper

Pearson

. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 1934; 26: 404–413.

Wei-Yann

Yunchan

Chia-Min

. Interval estimation of binomial proportion in clinical trials with a two-stage design. Stat Med 2008; 27: 15–35.

Donglin

Fei

Kuolung

et al.

Hypothesis testing for two-stage designs with over or under enrollment. Stat Med 2015; 34: 2417–2426.

Friedberg

Mahadevan

Cebula

et al.

Bernstein. Phase II study of alisertib, a selective Aurora A kinase inhibitor, in relapsed and refractory aggressive B- and T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 44–50.

10.

Wang

. On construction of the smallest one-sided confidence interval for the difference of two proportions. Ann Stat 2010; 38: 1227–1243.

11.

Guogen

Changxing

. Unconditional tests for comparing two ordered multinomials. Stat Meth Med Res 2016; 25: 241–254.

12.

Guogen

Weizhen

. ExactCIdiff: an R package for computing exact confidence intervals for the difference of two proportions. R J 2013; 5: 62–71.

13.

Guogen

Gregory

Alan

et al.

Optimal adaptive two-stage designs for early phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 2016; 35: 1257–1266.

14.

Weizhen

Guogen

. Exact confidence intervals for the relative risk and the odds ratio. Biometrics 2015; 71: 985–995.

15.

Weizhen

Zhongzhan

. Asymptotic infimum coverage probability for interval estimation of proportions. Metrika 2014; 77: 635–646.