Skip to main content
  • 871 Accesses

Abstract

Phase II exploratory clinical trials in oncology are often designed as single-arm trials using a binary efficacy outcome with or without interim monitoring. This chapter focused on the Bayesian designs which considered both efficacy and safety outcomes associated with early stopping. In particular, we introduce a Bayesian adaptive design denoted as predictive sample size selection design (PSSD). The design allows for sample size selection following any planned interim analyses for early stopping of a trial, together with sample size determination. An extension of the PSSD to add continuous monitoring of safety is also described. We investigate the operating characteristics of the design through simulation studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, Van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Christian MC, Gwyther SG. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–16. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Simon R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10:1–10. doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90015-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zohar S, Teramukai S, Zhou Y. Bayesian design and conduct of phase II single-arm clinical trials with binary outcomes: a tutorial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2008;29:608–16. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2007.11.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tan SB, Machin D. Bayesian two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 2002;21:1991–2012. doi:10.1002/sim.1176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mayo MS, Gajewski BJ. Bayesian sample size calculations in phase II clinical trials using informative conjugate priors. Control Clin Trials. 2004;25:157–67. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2003.11.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gajewski BJ, Mayo MS. Bayesian sample size calculations in phase II clinical trials using a mixture of informative priors. Stat Med. 2006;25:2554–66. doi:10.1002/sim.2450.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Whitehead J, Valdés-Márquez E, Johnson P, Graham G. Bayesian sample size for exploratory clinical trials incorporating historical data. Stat Med. 2008;27:2307–27. doi:10.1002/sim.3140.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Sambucini V. A Bayesian predictive two-stage design for phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 2008;27:1199–224. doi:10.1002/sim.3021.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Brutti P, De Santis F, Gubbiotti S. Robust Bayesian sample size determination in clinical trials. Stat Med. 2008;27:2290–306. doi:10.1002/sim.3175.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Sambucini V. A Bayesian predictive strategy for an adaptive two-stage design in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 2010;29:1430–42. doi:10.1002/sim.3800.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Brutti P, De Santis F, Gubbiotti S. Mixtures of prior distributions for predictive Bayesian sample size calculations in clinical trials. Stat Med. 2009;28:2185–201. doi:10.1002/sim.3609.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee JJ, Liu DD. A predictive probability design for phase II cancer clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2008;5:93–106. doi:10.1177/1740774508089279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Teramukai S, Daimon T, Zohar S. A Bayesian predictive sample size selection design for single-arm exploratory clinical trials. Stat Med. 2012;31:4243–54. doi:10.1002/sim.5505.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Bryant J, Day R. Incorporating toxicity considerations into the design of two-stage phase II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1995;51:1372–83.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Thall PF, Simon R, Estey EH. Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single-arm clinical trials with multiple outcomes. Stat Med. 1995;14:357–79. doi:10.1002/sim.4780140404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Conaway MR, Petroni GR. Designs for phase II trials allowing for a trade-off between response and toxicity. Biometrics. 1996;52:1375–86.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Stallard N, Thall PF, Whitehead J. Decision theoretic designs for phase II clinical trials with multiple outcomes. Biometrics. 1999;55:971–7. doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.1999.00971.x.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen Y, Smith BJ. Adaptive group sequential design for phase II clinical trials: a Bayesian decision theoretic approach. Stat Med. 2009;28:3347–62. doi:10.1002/sim.3711.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Teramukai S, Daimon T, Zohar S. An extension of Bayesian predictive sample size selection designs for monitoring efficacy and safety. Stat Med. 2015;34:3029–39. doi:10.1002/sim.6550.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Ray HE, Rai SN. Flexible bivariate phase II clinical trial design incorporating toxicity and response on different schedules. Stat Med. 2013;32:470–85. doi:10.1002/sim.5671.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Marlin E, Zohar S, Jérôme C, Veyrat-Masson R, Marceau G, Paillard C, Auvringnon A, Le Moine P, Gandemer V, Sapin V, Halle P, Boiret-Dupré N, Chevret S, Deméocq F, Dubray C, Kanold J. Hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization and harvesting in children with malignancies: do the advantages of pegfilgrastim really translate into clinical benefit? Bone Marrow Transplant. 2009;43:919–25. doi:10.1038/bmt.2008.412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Biswas S, Liu DD, Lee JJ, Berry DA. Bayesian clinical trials at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. Clin Trials. 2009;6:205–16. doi:10.1177/1740774509104992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Brutti P, Gubbiotti S, Sambucini V. An extension of the single threshold design for monitoring efficacy and safety in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med. 2011;30:1648–64. doi:10.1002/sim.4229.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by Grant-in Aid for Scientific Research (26330037) from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Japan. The author is grateful to Dr. Takashi Daimon, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo, Japan, and Dr. Sarah Zohar, INSERM, U1138 team 22, Paris, France, for their contributions to this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Satoshi Teramukai .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Teramukai, S. (2017). Bayesian Phase II Single-Arm Designs. In: Matsui, S., Crowley, J. (eds) Frontiers of Biostatistical Methods and Applications in Clinical Oncology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0126-0_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics