Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 3, 2026

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
Designs for clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes based on stopping guidelines for lack of benefit
Patrick Royston1, Friederike M-S Barthel, Mahesh Kb Parmar
1MRC Clinical Trials, London NW1 2DA UK. pr@ctu.mrc.ac.uk
Background:
The pace of novel medical treatments and approaches to therapy has accelerated in recent years. Unfortunately, many potential therapeutic advances do not fulfil their promise when subjected to randomized controlled trials. It is therefore highly desirable to speed up the process of evaluating new treatment options, particularly in phase II and phase III trials. To help realize such an aim, in 2003, Royston and colleagues proposed a class of multi-arm, two-stage trial designs intended to eliminate poorly performing contenders at a first stage (point in time). Only treatments showing a predefined degree of advantage against a control treatment were allowed through to a second stage. Arms that survived the first-stage comparison on an intermediate outcome measure entered a second stage of patient accrual, culminating in comparisons against control on the definitive outcome measure. The intermediate outcome is typically on the causal pathway to the definitive outcome (i.e. the features that cause an intermediate event also tend to cause a definitive event), an example in cancer being progression-free and overall survival. Although the 2003 paper alluded to multi-arm trials, most of the essential design features concerned only two-arm trials. Here, we extend the two-arm designs to allow an arbitrary number of stages, thereby increasing flexibility by building in several 'looks' at the accumulating data. Such trials can terminate at any of the intermediate stages or the final stage.
Methods:
We describe the trial design and the mathematics required to obtain the timing of the 'looks' and the overall significance level and power of the design. We support our results by extensive simulation studies. As an example, we discuss the design of the STAMPEDE trial in prostate cancer.
Results:
The mathematical results on significance level and power are confirmed by the computer simulations. Our approach compares favourably with methodology based on beta spending functions and on monitoring only a primary outcome measure for lack of benefit of the new treatment.
Conclusions:
The new designs are practical and are supported by theory. They hold considerable promise for speeding up the evaluation of new treatments in phase II and III trials.
Insights
New multi-stage clinical trial designs accelerate the evaluation of novel therapies. These flexible designs allow multiple data reviews, efficiently identifying promising treatments for phase II and III trials.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Trials
- Biostatistics
- Drug Development
Background:
- Accelerated development of novel medical treatments necessitates efficient trial designs.
- Many promising therapies fail in later-stage randomized controlled trials.
- Early identification of ineffective treatments is crucial for resource optimization.
Purpose of the Study:
- To extend existing two-arm, two-stage trial designs to accommodate an arbitrary number of stages.
- To enhance flexibility in clinical trial evaluations by incorporating multiple interim analyses.
- To provide a framework for more efficient assessment of new therapeutic options.
Main Methods:
- Development of mathematical framework for multi-stage trial designs.
- Calculation of optimal timing for interim analyses ('looks').
- Assessment of overall significance level and statistical power for the proposed designs.
Main Results:
- Mathematical derivations for significance and power were validated through extensive computer simulations.
- The proposed multi-stage designs demonstrated favorable comparisons against existing methods, including beta spending functions.
- The approach effectively identifies lack of benefit using intermediate and primary outcome measures.
Conclusions:
- The novel multi-stage trial designs are both practical and theoretically sound.
- These designs offer a promising approach to expedite the evaluation of new treatments in phase II and III clinical trials.
- Implementation of these designs can lead to faster identification of effective therapies.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Survival Curves
The Kaplan-Meier estimator is the most common method for constructing survival curves. This...
Assumptions of Survival Analysis
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...
