Predicting analysis time in events-driven clinical trials using accumulating time-to-event surrogate information

被引:1
|
作者
Wang, Jianming [1 ]
Ke, Chunlei [2 ]
Yu, Zhinuan [1 ]
Fu, Lei [1 ]
Dornseif, Bruce [1 ]
机构
[1] Celgene Corp, Biometr & Data Operat, Summit, NJ 07901 USA
[2] Amgen Inc, Global Biostat Sci, Thousand Oaks, CA USA
关键词
event driven; analysis time prediction; overall survival; time-to-progression; surrogate information; PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL; SAMPLE-SIZE; FOLLOW-UP; DISTRIBUTIONS; MODEL;
D O I
10.1002/pst.1732
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
For clinical trials with time-to-event endpoints, predicting the accrual of the events of interest with precision is critical in determining the timing of interim and final analyses. For example, overall survival (OS) is often chosen as the primary efficacy endpoint in oncology studies, with planned interim and final analyses at a pre-specified number of deaths. Often, correlated surrogate information, such as time-to-progression (TTP) and progression-free survival, are also collected as secondary efficacy endpoints. It would be appealing to borrow strength from the surrogate information to improve the precision of the analysis time prediction. Currently available methods in the literature for predicting analysis timings do not consider utilizing the surrogate information. In this article, using OS and TTP as an example, a general parametric model for OS and TTP is proposed, with the assumption that disease progression could change the course of the overall survival. Progression-free survival, related both to OS and TTP, will be handled separately, as it can be derived from OS and TTP. The authors seek to develop a prediction procedure using a Bayesian method and provide detailed implementation strategies under certain assumptions. Simulations are performed to evaluate the performance of the proposed method. An application to a real study is also provided. Copyright (C) 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:198 / 207
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Predicting events in clinical trials using two time-to-event outcomes
    Mu, Rongji
    Xu, Jin
    [J]. BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2018, 60 (04) : 815 - 826
  • [2] A hybrid approach to predicting events in clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes
    Fang, Liang
    Su, Zheng
    [J]. CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2011, 32 (05) : 755 - 759
  • [3] Surrogate marker analysis in cancer clinical trials through time-to-event mediation techniques
    Vandenberghe, Sjouke
    Duchateau, Luc
    Slaets, Leen
    Bogaerts, Jan
    Vansteelandt, Stijn
    [J]. STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2018, 27 (11) : 3367 - 3385
  • [4] Projection of power and events in clinical trials with a time-to-event outcome
    Royston, Patrick
    Barthel, Friederike M-S
    [J]. STATA JOURNAL, 2010, 10 (03): : 386 - 394
  • [5] Predicting study duration in clinical trials with a time-to-event endpoint
    Machida, Ryunosuke
    Fujii, Yosuke
    Sozu, Takashi
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2021, 40 (10) : 2413 - 2421
  • [6] Comparison of Time-to-Event Data for Clinical Trials
    Nadarajah, Saralees
    [J]. MONTE CARLO METHODS AND APPLICATIONS, 2007, 13 (01): : 21 - 35
  • [7] Predicting analysis time in event-driven clinical trials with event-reporting lag
    Wang, Jianming
    Ke, Chunlei
    Jiang, Qi
    Zhang, Charlie
    Snapinn, Steven
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2012, 31 (09) : 801 - 811
  • [8] An evaluation of statistical methods for predicting timelines for reaching target number of events in clinical trials with time-to-event endpoints
    Clark, Emma
    Helms, Hans-Joachim
    Stanzel, Sven
    Xia, Fan
    [J]. TRIALS, 2017, 18
  • [9] Counterfactual mediation analysis in the multistate model framework for surrogate and clinical time-to-event outcomes in randomized controlled trials
    Weir, Isabelle R.
    Rider, Jennifer R.
    Trinquart, Ludovic
    [J]. PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2022, 21 (01) : 163 - 175
  • [10] Power considerations for clinical trials using multivariate time-to-event data
    Hughes, MD
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1997, 16 (08) : 865 - 882