A standardization method to adjust for the effect of patient selection in phase II clinical trials
- 5 March 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Statistics in Medicine
- Vol. 20 (6), 883-892
- https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.706
Abstract
New combination regimens evaluated in phase II cancer clinical trials often show promising results compared to the standard therapy for a disease system. Selection of patients with a better prognosis can be a prominent factor for this optimism. For most disease systems, prognostic variables that are related to the outcome are available and are called risk factors. Patients are classified into risk categories depending on the number of risk factors they possess. The patient distribution is defined as the proportion of patients falling into each of these risk categories. Typically, the patient distribution observed for a phase II study differs from the standard therapy reports so that the outcomes are not comparable. A randomized trial is the ultimate step for establishing the efficacy of a new treatment. In order to determine whether a regimen should progress to a phase III trial, we suggest adjusting the standard therapy outcome for the effect of the observed phase II patient distribution. If the endpoint of interest is tumour response proportion, a weighted average utilizing the standard therapy response proportions and the phase II patient distribution would provide an estimate of the adjusted standard therapy response proportion. Confirmatory phase II trials often attempt to estimate median survival in addition to response proportion, since this is the primary endpoint for most phase III cancer studies. Because data are censored, we propose an adjustment method based on the bootstrap resampling technique. We illustrate the problem of disparate patient selection with data from melanoma studies and demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed adjustment method with data from bladder cancer studies. A simulation study indicates that the magnitude of the adjustment is heavily dependent on the degree of separation of the risk categories. SAS code is available on a website (http://lib.stat.cmu.edu) for easy implementation. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Ifosfamide, paclitaxel, and cisplatin for patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tractCancer, 2000
- Long-Term Survival in Metastatic Transitional-Cell Carcinoma and Prognostic Factors Predicting Outcome of TherapyJournal of Clinical Oncology, 1999
- Phase III Multicenter Randomized Trial of the Dartmouth Regimen Versus Dacarbazine in Patients With Metastatic MelanomaJournal of Clinical Oncology, 1999
- Dacarbazine, cisplatin and carmustine, with or without tamoxifen, for metastatic melanoma: 5-year follow-upMelanoma Research, 1995
- Prognostic factors in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma: A multivariate analysisCancer, 1993
- Effective combination chemo/hormonal therapy for malignant melanoma: Experience with three consecutive trialsInternational Journal of Cancer, 1992
- Incorporating historical control data in planning phase II clinical trialsStatistics in Medicine, 1990
- Publication Bias and Dissemination of Clinical ResearchJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1989
- Sample size considerations for studies comparing survival curves using historical controlsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1988
- Reporting results of cancer treatmentCancer, 1981