-
Balancing events, not patients, maximizes power of the logrank test: and other insights on unequal randomization in survival trials
Authors:
Godwin Yung,
Kaspar Rufibach,
Marcel Wolbers,
Ray Lin,
Yi Liu
Abstract:
We revisit the question of what randomization ratio (RR) maximizes power of the logrank test in event-driven survival trials under proportional hazards (PH). By comparing three approximations of the logrank test (Schoenfeld, Freedman, Rubinstein) to empirical simulations, we find that the RR that maximizes power is the RR that balances number of events across treatment arms at the end of the trial…
▽ More
We revisit the question of what randomization ratio (RR) maximizes power of the logrank test in event-driven survival trials under proportional hazards (PH). By comparing three approximations of the logrank test (Schoenfeld, Freedman, Rubinstein) to empirical simulations, we find that the RR that maximizes power is the RR that balances number of events across treatment arms at the end of the trial. This contradicts the common misconception implied by Schoenfeld's approximation that 1:1 randomization maximizes power. Besides power, we consider other factors that might influence the choice of RR (accrual, trial duration, sample size, etc.). We perform simulations to better understand how unequal randomization might impact these factors in practice. Altogether, we derive 6 insights to guide statisticians in the design of survival trials considering unequal randomization.
△ Less
Submitted 3 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
Considerations for Master Protocols Using External Controls
Authors:
Jie Chen,
Xiaoyun,
Li,
Chengxing,
Lu,
Sammy Yuan,
Godwin Yung,
**g**g Ye,
Hong Tian,
Jianchang Lin
Abstract:
There has been an increasing use of master protocols in oncology clinical trials because of its efficiency and flexibility to accelerate cancer drug development. Depending on the study objective and design, a master protocol trial can be a basket trial, an umbrella trial, a platform trial, or any other form of trials in which multiple investigational products and/or subpopulations are studied unde…
▽ More
There has been an increasing use of master protocols in oncology clinical trials because of its efficiency and flexibility to accelerate cancer drug development. Depending on the study objective and design, a master protocol trial can be a basket trial, an umbrella trial, a platform trial, or any other form of trials in which multiple investigational products and/or subpopulations are studied under a single protocol. Master protocols can use external data and evidence (e.g., external controls) for treatment effect estimation, which can further improve efficiency of master protocol trials. This paper provides an overview of different types of external controls and their unique features when used in master protocols. Some key considerations in master protocols with external controls are discussed including construction of estimands, assessment of fit-for-use real-world data, and considerations for different types of master protocols. Similarities and differences between regular randomized controlled trials and master protocols when using external controls are discussed. A targeted learning-based causal roadmap is presented which constitutes three key steps: (1) define a target statistical estimand that aligns with the causal estimand for the study objective, (2) use an efficient estimator to estimate the target statistical estimand and its uncertainty, and (3) evaluate the impact of causal assumptions on the study conclusion by performing sensitivity analyses. Two illustrative examples for master protocols using external controls are discussed for their merits and possible improvement in causal effect estimation.
△ Less
Submitted 10 November, 2023; v1 submitted 11 July, 2023;
originally announced July 2023.
-
Duration of and time to response in oncology clinical trials from the perspective of the estimand framework
Authors:
Hans-Jochen Weber,
Stephen Corson,
Jiang Li,
Francois Mercier,
Satrajit Roychoudhury,
Martin Oliver Sailer,
Stephen Sun,
Alexander Todd,
Godwin Yung
Abstract:
Duration of response (DOR) and time to response (TTR) are typically evaluated as secondary endpoints in early-stage clinical studies in oncology when efficacy is assessed by the best overall response (BOR) and presented as the overall response rate (ORR). Despite common use of DOR and TTR in particular in single-arm studies, the definition of these endpoints and the questions they are intended to…
▽ More
Duration of response (DOR) and time to response (TTR) are typically evaluated as secondary endpoints in early-stage clinical studies in oncology when efficacy is assessed by the best overall response (BOR) and presented as the overall response rate (ORR). Despite common use of DOR and TTR in particular in single-arm studies, the definition of these endpoints and the questions they are intended to answer remain unclear. Motivated by the estimand framework, we present relevant scientific questions of interest for DOR and TTR and propose corresponding estimand definitions. We elaborate on how to deal with relevant intercurrent events which should follow the same considerations as implemented for the primary response estimand. A case study in mantle cell lymphoma illustrates the implementation of relevant estimands of DOR and TTR. We close the paper with practical recommendations to implement DOR and TTR in clinical study protocols.
△ Less
Submitted 21 December, 2022;
originally announced December 2022.
-
Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 on the Objective and Analysis of Oncology Clinical Trials -- Application of the Estimand Framework
Authors:
Evgeny Degtyarev,
Kaspar Rufibach,
Yue Shentu,
Godwin Yung,
Michelle Casey,
Stefan Englert,
Feng Liu,
Yi Liu,
Oliver Sailer,
Jonathan Siegel,
Steven Sun,
Rui Tang,
Jiangxiu Zhou
Abstract:
COVID-19 outbreak has rapidly evolved into a global pandemic. The impact of COVID-19 on patient journeys in oncology represents a new risk to interpretation of trial results and its broad applicability for future clinical practice. We identify key intercurrent events that may occur due to COVID-19 in oncology clinical trials with a focus on time-to-event endpoints and discuss considerations pertai…
▽ More
COVID-19 outbreak has rapidly evolved into a global pandemic. The impact of COVID-19 on patient journeys in oncology represents a new risk to interpretation of trial results and its broad applicability for future clinical practice. We identify key intercurrent events that may occur due to COVID-19 in oncology clinical trials with a focus on time-to-event endpoints and discuss considerations pertaining to the other estimand attributes introduced in the ICH E9 addendum. We propose strategies to handle COVID-19 related intercurrent events, depending on their relationship with malignancy and treatment and the interpretability of data after them. We argue that the clinical trial objective from a world without COVID-19 pandemic remains valid. The estimand framework provides a common language to discuss the impact of COVID-19 in a structured and transparent manner. This demonstrates that the applicability of the framework may even go beyond what it was initially intended for.
△ Less
Submitted 21 June, 2020; v1 submitted 8 June, 2020;
originally announced June 2020.
