Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29474933›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials2018

An optimised multi-arm multi-stage clinical trial design for unknown variance.

Michael J Grayling, James M S Wason, Adrian P Mander

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Michael J GraylingHub for Trials Methodology Research, MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: mjg211@cam.ac.uk.
James M S WasonHub for Trials Methodology Research, MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK; Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
Adrian P ManderHub for Trials Methodology Research, MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UP_1302/4Medical Research Council MC_UP_1302/6Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/6
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multi-arm multi-stage trial designs can bring notable gains in efficiency to the drug development process. However, for normally distributed endpoints, the determination of a design typically depends on the assumption that the patient variance in response is known. In practice, this will not usually be the case. To allow for unknown variance, previous research explored the performance of t-test statistics, coupled with a quantile substitution procedure for modifying the stopping boundaries, at controlling the familywise error-rate to the nominal level. Here, we discuss an alternative method based on Monte Carlo simulation that allows the group size and stopping boundaries of a multi-arm multi-stage t-test to be optimised, according to some nominated optimality criteria. We consider several examples, provide R code for general implementation, and show that our designs confer a familywise error-rate and power close to the desired level. Consequently, this methodology will provide utility in future multi-arm multi-stage trials.

Indexed as

Analysis of VarianceClinical Trials as TopicMonte Carlo MethodData Interpretation, StatisticalEndpoint DeterminationHumansResearch DesignSample SizeFamilywise error-rateGroup sequentialInterim analysesMulti-arm multi-staget-Statistic

Identifiers

PMID29474933
PMCPMC5886309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.