Cargando…
Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials
BACKGROUND: The article aims to compare the efficiency of minimax, optimal and admissible criteria in Simon’s and Fleming’s two-stage design. METHODS: Three parameter settings (p(1)-p(0) = 0.25–0.05, 0.30–0.10, 0.50–0.30) are designed to compare the maximum sample size, the critical values and the e...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7240995/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32434577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01017-8 |
_version_ | 1783537002329669632 |
---|---|
author | Qin, Fei Wu, Jingwei Chen, Feng Wei, Yongyue Zhao, Yang Jiang, Zhiwei Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao |
author_facet | Qin, Fei Wu, Jingwei Chen, Feng Wei, Yongyue Zhao, Yang Jiang, Zhiwei Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao |
author_sort | Qin, Fei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The article aims to compare the efficiency of minimax, optimal and admissible criteria in Simon’s and Fleming’s two-stage design. METHODS: Three parameter settings (p(1)-p(0) = 0.25–0.05, 0.30–0.10, 0.50–0.30) are designed to compare the maximum sample size, the critical values and the expected sample size for minimax, optimal and admissible designs. Type I & II error constraints (α, β) vary across (0.10, 0.10), (0.05, 0.20) and (0.05, 0.10), respectively. RESULTS: In both Simon’s and Fleming’s two-stage designs, the maximum sample size of admissible design is smaller than optimal design but larger than minimax design. Meanwhile, the expected samples size of admissible design is smaller than minimax design but larger than optimal design. Mostly, the maximum sample size and expected sample size in Fleming’s designs are considerably smaller than that of Simon’s designs. CONCLUSIONS: Whenever (p(0), p(1)) is pre-specified, it is better to explore in the range of probability q, based on relative importance between maximum sample size and expected sample size, and determine which design to choose. When q is unknown, optimal design may be more favorable for drugs with limited efficacy. Contrarily, minimax design is recommended if treatment demonstrates impressive efficacy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7240995 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72409952020-05-29 Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials Qin, Fei Wu, Jingwei Chen, Feng Wei, Yongyue Zhao, Yang Jiang, Zhiwei Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: The article aims to compare the efficiency of minimax, optimal and admissible criteria in Simon’s and Fleming’s two-stage design. METHODS: Three parameter settings (p(1)-p(0) = 0.25–0.05, 0.30–0.10, 0.50–0.30) are designed to compare the maximum sample size, the critical values and the expected sample size for minimax, optimal and admissible designs. Type I & II error constraints (α, β) vary across (0.10, 0.10), (0.05, 0.20) and (0.05, 0.10), respectively. RESULTS: In both Simon’s and Fleming’s two-stage designs, the maximum sample size of admissible design is smaller than optimal design but larger than minimax design. Meanwhile, the expected samples size of admissible design is smaller than minimax design but larger than optimal design. Mostly, the maximum sample size and expected sample size in Fleming’s designs are considerably smaller than that of Simon’s designs. CONCLUSIONS: Whenever (p(0), p(1)) is pre-specified, it is better to explore in the range of probability q, based on relative importance between maximum sample size and expected sample size, and determine which design to choose. When q is unknown, optimal design may be more favorable for drugs with limited efficacy. Contrarily, minimax design is recommended if treatment demonstrates impressive efficacy. BioMed Central 2020-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7240995/ /pubmed/32434577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01017-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Qin, Fei Wu, Jingwei Chen, Feng Wei, Yongyue Zhao, Yang Jiang, Zhiwei Bai, Jianling Yu, Hao Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials |
title | Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials |
title_full | Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials |
title_fullStr | Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials |
title_short | Optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase II oncology clinical trials |
title_sort | optimal, minimax and admissible two-stage design for phase ii oncology clinical trials |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7240995/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32434577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01017-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT qinfei optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials AT wujingwei optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials AT chenfeng optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials AT weiyongyue optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials AT zhaoyang optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials AT jiangzhiwei optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials AT baijianling optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials AT yuhao optimalminimaxandadmissibletwostagedesignforphaseiioncologyclinicaltrials |