A two-stage phase II clinical trial design with nested criteria for early stopping and efficacy

Using short-term endpoints to improve interim decision making and trial duration in two-stage phase II trials with nested binary endpoints

In oncology, phase II clinical trials are often planned as single-arm two-stage designs with a binary endpoint, for example, progression-free survival after 12 months, and the option to stop for futility after the first stage. Simon's two-stage design is a very popular approach but depending on the follow-up time required to measure the patients' outcomes the trial may have to be paused undesirably long. To shorten this forced interruption, it was proposed to use a short-term endpoint for the interim decision, such as progression-free survival after 3 months. We show that if the assumptions for the short-term endpoint are misspecified, the decision-making in the interim can be misleading, resulting in a great loss of statistical power. For the setting of a binary endpoint with nested measurements, such as progression-free survival, we propose two approaches that utilize all available short-term and long-term assessments of the endpoint to guide the interim decision. One approach is based on conditional power and the other is based on Bayesian posterior predictive probability of success. In extensive simulations, we show that both methods perform similarly, when appropriately calibrated, and can greatly improve power compared to the existing approach in settings with slow patient recruitment. Software code to implement the methods is made publicly available.

Bayesian single-to-double arm transition design using both short-term and long-term endpoints

The choice between single-arm designs versus randomized double-arm designs has been contentiously debated in the literature of phase II oncology trials. Recently, as a compromise, the single-to-double arm transition design was proposed, combining the two designs into one trial over two stages. Successful implementation of the two-stage transition design requires a suspension period at the end of the first stage to collect the response data of the already enrolled patients. When the evaluation of the primary efficacy endpoint is overly long, the between-stage suspension period may unfavorably prolong the trial duration and cause a delay in treating future eligible patients. To accelerate the trial, we propose a Bayesian single-to-double arm design with short-term endpoints (BSDS), where an intermediate short-term endpoint is used for making early termination decisions at the end of the single-arm stage, followed by an evaluation of the long-term endpoint at the end of the subsequent double-arm stage. Bayesian posterior probabilities are used as the primary decision-making tool at the end of the trial. Design calibration steps are proposed for this Bayesian monitoring process to control the frequentist operating characteristics and minimize the expected sample size. Extensive simulation studies have demonstrated that our design has comparable power and average sample size but a much shorter trial duration than conventional single-to-double arm design. Applications of the design are illustrated using two phase II oncology trials with binary endpoints.

Extending the two-stage single arm phase II clinical trial design to the delayed response scenario

Two-stage single arm designs are widely used in phase II clinical trials with binary endpoints. The trial may be stopped early due to insufficient positive responses in the first stage. There may be some enrolled subjects who have yet to respond by the end of the first stage, and their data are ignored if the first stage results in rejection of the trial. It is possible that the result after the first stage is rejection by a slim margin, while the results of pipeline subjects are quite positive. In this case, combining the data from the two sources may provide a valuable opportunity to rescue a promising treatment that was mistakenly rejected. We propose a novel double-check design to take advantage of the pipeline subjects' data to establish a rescue criterion based on two-stage design. When the rescue criterion is met, the decision to reject the trial at the end of the first stage can be reversed, allowing the trial to continue. A derivation based on a binomial distribution shows that the double-check strategy can strictly preserve the type I error rate. Further examination shows that the strategy can provide a slight increase in overall power and a substantial increase in conditional power when the proportion of positive response at the end of the first stage is at the margin. The extra rescue opportunity's cost is pretty low, only a slight increasing in the expected sample size.