Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 15, 2026

Selecting Multiple Biomarker Subsets with Similarly Effective Binary Classification Performances
Published on: October 11, 2018
Adaptive randomized phase II design for biomarker threshold selection and independent evaluation
Lindsay A Renfro1, Christina M Coughlin2, Axel M Grothey3
1Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Renfro.lindsay@mayo.edu.
Background:
Frequently a biomarker capable of defining a patient population with enhanced response to an experimental agent is not fully validated with a known threshold at the start of a phase II trial. When such candidate predictive markers are evaluated and/or validated retrospectively, over-accrual of patients less likely to benefit from the regimen may result, leading to underpowered analyses or sub-optimal patient care.
Purpose:
We propose an adaptive randomized phase II study design incorporating prospective biomarker threshold identification (or non-identification), possible early futility stopping, potential mid-trial accrual restriction to marker-positive subjects, and final marker and treatment evaluation in the patient population identified as most likely to benefit.
Methods:
An interim analysis is used to determine whether an initially unselected trial should stop early for futility, continue without a promising marker, or adapt accrual and resize (up to a pre-determined maximum) according to a promising biomarker. Final efficacy analyses are performed in the target population identified at the interim as most likely to benefit from the experimental regimen. Simulation studies demonstrate control of false-positive error rates, power, reduced average sample size, and other favorable aspects.
Results:
The design performs well at identifying a truly predictive biomarker at interim analysis, and subsequently restricting accrual to patients most likely to benefit from the experimental treatment. Type I and type II error rates are adequately controlled by restricting the range of marker prevalence via the candidate thresholds, and by careful consideration of the timing of interim analysis.
Conclusions:
In situations where identification and validation of a naturally continuous biomarker are desired within a randomized phase II trial, the design presented herein offers a potential solution.
More Related Videos
07:40Preparation of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell Pellets and Plasma from a Single Blood Draw at Clinical Trial Sites for Biomarker Analysis
Published on: March 20, 2021
12:18A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment
Published on: January 11, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs
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,...
Bioavailability Study Design: Single Versus Multiple Dose Studies
Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients