Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Optimal two-stage randomized phase II clinical trials.

Brent R Logan1

  • 1Division of Biostatistics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, 53226-0509, USA. blogan@mcw.edu

Clinical Trials (London, England)
|November 11, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Donor-Specific Transplant Outcomes from BMTCTN 1702: A Multi-Center Prospective Biological-Assignment Trial.

Blood advances·2026
Same author

TITE-safety: a robust time-to-event safety monitoring approach for clinical trials.

Biometrics·2026
Same author

Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Access and Patient Diversity.

JAMA network open·2026
Same author

Differential effects of two common GVHD prophylaxis regimens on the gut microbiome: Results from the BMT CTN 1801 study.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2026
Same author

The BIOPREVENT machine-learning algorithm predicts chronic graft-versus-host disease and mortality risk using posttransplant biomarkers.

The Journal of clinical investigation·2026
Same author

Neurodevelopmental outcomes following hematopoietic cell transplantation for patients with severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID): A PIDTC study.

Journal of human immunity·2026
Same journal

A statistical evaluation of decision-making methods and the efficiency of Bayesian multi-arm multi-stage trials.

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Accounting for non-adherence: A re-analysis of the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results trial.

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Phase I design for partially ordered groups with late-onset toxicity.

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Trial informed consent forms, the Declaration of Helsinki and the SPIRIT 2025 statement.

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026
Same journal

17th Annual University of Pennsylvania Conference on statistical issues in clinical trials - Covariate adjustment in randomized clinical trials: New methods and applications (Morning panel discussion).

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026
Same journal

17th Annual University of Pennsylvania Conference on statistical issues in clinical trials - Covariate adjustment in randomized clinical trials: New methods and applications (Afternoon panel discussion).

Clinical trials (London, England)·2026
See all related articles

This study introduces an adaptive two-stage randomized phase II clinical trial design. This innovative approach optimizes sample size, improving efficiency for evaluating multiple new treatments compared to traditional methods.

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Trials
  • Biostatistics
  • Drug Development

Background:

  • Randomized phase II trials efficiently evaluate multiple treatments before phase III studies.
  • Selection designs lack minimal efficacy assessment and early stopping for futility.
  • Classic Simon designs can be inefficient with large maximum sample sizes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose an adaptive two-stage randomized phase II clinical trial design.
  • To improve efficiency and manage sample size adaptively based on treatment arm progression.
  • To maintain desirable operating characteristics while reducing maximum planned sample size.

Main Methods:

  • A novel two-stage randomized phase II design is presented.
  • Sample size is adaptively adjusted in the second stage based on the number of arms advancing from the first stage.

Related Experiment Videos

  • The design employs optimality criteria similar to Simon's single-arm studies.

    • Main Results:

    • The proposed adaptive design maintains operating characteristics comparable to using multiple single-arm studies.
    • It generally achieves a smaller actual sample size when most treatments demonstrate efficacy.
    • This leads to significant efficiencies in the maximum planned sample size.

    Conclusions:

    • The adaptive two-stage design offers an efficient alternative for phase II clinical trials with multiple treatment arms.
    • It balances the need for efficacy assessment with practical sample size considerations.
    • This approach enhances the feasibility of early-phase drug development research.