Background A major contribution to the statistical literature on group sequential designs was provided by Pampallona and Tsiatis who developed closed form functions that can be used to iteratively calculate the boundary points of a family of popular group sequential designs [1]. A related area of interest is the use of conditional probability calculations to make interim decisions in stochastic curtailment procedures.
Purpose The purpose of the paper is to develop group sequential designs based on conditional probabilities, to compare our results to the general closed form family of designs developed by Pampallona and Tsiatis, and to relate these to commonly used stochastic curtailment procedures.
Methods The problem and its solution are formulated and derived mathematically. A graphical interpretation of the results provides the reader with an alternative mechanism to understand the results and their significance.
Results One-sided group sequential design boundary points, as closed form functions, are derived from conditional probability statements. These conditional probability statements can be interpreted as the probability, at the final analysis, of reversing the conclusion reached at an interim state. Under mild constraints, these boundary points are identical to the Pampallona and Tsiatis boundary points. At any interim stage when a boundary point is attained or surpassed we suggest a graphical approach to examine the conditional probability of reversing the interim decision at the final stage versus a range of possible parameter values. For stochastic curtailment procedures, we recommend relaxing (increasing) the conditional probability levels to at least 0.50 so that early stopping is at least as likely as for the O'Brien-Fleming procedure.
Limitations The results are limited to one-sided group sequential designs.
Conclusions Conditional probabilities of reversing interim decisions provides a useful concept to develop group sequential designs and to evaluate stochastic curtailment procedures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Pampallona S, Tsiatis AA. Group sequential designs for one-sided and two-sided hypothesis testing with provision for early stopping in favour of the null hypothesis. J Statist Plann Inf1994; 42: 19-35.
2.
2. O'Brien P, Fleming T. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics1979; 35: 549-556.
3.
3. Pocock S. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika1977; 64:191-198.
4.
4. Lan KKG, Demets DL. Changing frequency of interim analysis in sequential monitoring. Biometrics1989; 45:1017-1020.
5.
5. Burington BE, Emerson SS. Flexible implementations of group sequential stopping rules using constrained boundaries. Biometrics2003; 59: 770-777.
6.
6. Schs'fer H, MuIIer HH. Construction of group sequential designs in clinical trials on the basis of detectable treatment differences. Stat Med 2004;23:1413-1424.
7.
7. Lakatos E. Designing complex group sequential survival trials. Stat Med2002; 21: 1969-1989.
8.
8. Whitehead J. Sequential methods based on the boundaries approach for the clinical comparison of survival times. Stat Med1994; 13: 1357-1368.
9.
9. Jennison J, Turnbull, B. Interim analyses: The repeated confidence interval approach (with discussion). J R Stat Soc B1989; 51: 305-361.
10.
10. Jennison J, Turnbull, B. Group sequential methods with applications to clinical trials. Boca Raton, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2000.
11.
11. Durrleman S, Simon, R. Planning and monitoring of equivalence studies. Biometrics1990; 46: 329-336.
12.
12. Lin D, Wei L. Repeated confidence intervals for a scale change in a sequential survival study. Biometrics1991; 47: 289-294.
13.
13. Lin D, Wei L, DeMets D. Exact statistical inference for group sequential trials. Biometrics1991; 47: 1399-1408.
14.
14. Su J, Lachin J. Group sequential distribution-free methods for the analysis of multivariate observations. Biometrics1992; 48: 1033-1042.
15.
15. Fleming T. Evaluating therapeutic interventions: Some issues and experiences (with discussion). Stat Sci1992; 7:428-456.
16.
16. Coe P, Tamhane A. Exact repeated confidence intervals for Bernoulli parameters in a group sequential trial. Control Clin Trials1993; 14: 19-29.
17.
17. Keaney K, Wei L. Interim analyses based on median survival times. Biometrika1994; 81: 279-286.
18.
18. Hsu J, Wwang J, Liu H, Ruberg S. Confidence intervals associated with tests for bioequivalence. Biometrika1994; 81: 103-114.
19.
19. Lan KKG, Simon R, Halperin M. Stochastically curtailed testing in long term clinical trials. Commun Stat C1982; 1: 207-219.
20.
20. Halperin M, Lan KKG, Ware JH, Johnson NJ, DeMets DL. An aid to data monitoring in long-term clinical trials. Control Clin Trials1982; 3: 311-323.
21.
21. Anderson PK. Conditional power calculations as an aid in the decision whether to continue a clinical trial. Control Clin Trials1987; 8: 67-74.
22.
22. Henderson WG, Fisher SG,Weber L, Hammermeister KE, Sethi G. Conditional power for arbitrary survival curves to decide whether to extend a clinical trial, Control Clin Trials1991; 12:304-313.
23.
23. Cantor AB. Power estimation for rank-tests using censored data conditional and unconditional. Control Clin Trials1991; 12: 462-473.
24.
24. Chang MN, Shuster JJ. Interim analysis for randomized clinical trials simulating the predictive distribution of the log-rank test statistic. Biometrics1994; 50: 827-833.
25.
25. Betensky RA. Conditional power calculations for early acceptance of HO embedded in sequential tests. Stat Med199716: 465-477.
26.
26. Proschan MA. Conditional power with Fischer's least significant difference procedure. Biometrika1997; 84:197-208.
27.
27. Lin DY, Yao Q, Ying ZL. A general theory of stochastic curtailment for censored survival data. J Am Stat Assoc1999; 94: 446-510.
28.
28. Bautista OM, Bain RP, Lachin JM. A flexible stochastic curtailing procedure for the log-rank test. Control Clinl Trials2000; 21: 428-439.
29.
29. Gould AL. Sample size re-estimation: recent developments, and practical considerations. Stat Med2001; 20: 2645-2643.
30.
30. Shen Y, Cai JW. Sample size re-estimation for clinical trials with censored data. J Am Stat Assoc2003; 98:418-426.
31.
31. Brannath W. Optimal conditional error functions for the control of conditional power. Biometrics2004; 60:715-723.
32.
32. Tan M,Xiong X, Kutner MH. Clinical trial designs based on sequential conditional probability ratio tests and reverse stochastic curtailing. Biometrics1998; 54: 682-695.
33.
33. Freedman LS, Spiegelhalter DJ, Parmar MKB. The what, why and how of Bayesian clinical trials monitoring. Stat Med1994; 13: 1371-1384.
35. Friedlin B, Korn EL, George SL. Data monitoring committees and interim monitoring guidelines. Controlled Clinical Trials1999; 20: 395-407.
36.
36. Freidlin B, and Korn EL. A comment on futility monitoring. Controlled Clinical Trials2002; 23: 355-366.
37.
37. Henderson IC, Berry DA, Demetri GD, Cirrincione CT, Goldstein LJ, Martino S. et al.Improved outcomes from adding sequential Paclitaxel but ot rom escalating Doxorubicin dose in an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with node-positive primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol,2003; 21: 976-983.
38.
38. Armitage P, McPherson C, Rowe B. Repeated significance tests on accumulating data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A1969; 132: 235-244.
39.
39. George SL, Desu MM. Planning the size and duration of a clinical trial studying the time to some critical event. Journal of Chronic Disease1974; 27: 15-24.
