Using an early outcome as the sole source of information of interim decisions regarding treatment effect on a long-term endpoint: The non-Gaussian case.

In randomized clinical trials that use a long-term efficacy endpoint, the follow-up time necessary to observe the endpoint may be substantial. In such trials, an attractive option is to consider an interim analysis based solely on an early outcome that could be used to expedite the evaluation of treatment's efficacy. Garcia Barrado et al. (Pharm Stat. 2022; 21: 209-219) developed a methodology that allows introducing such an early interim analysis for the case when both the early outcome and the long-term endpoint are normally-distributed, continuous variables. We extend the methodology to any combination of the early-outcome and long-term-endpoint types. As an example, we consider the case of a binary outcome and a time-to-event endpoint. We further evaluate the potential gain in operating characteristics (power, expected trial duration, and expected sample size) of a trial with such an interim analysis in function of the properties of the early outcome as a surrogate for the long-term endpoint.

Using an interim analysis based exclusively on an early outcome in a randomized clinical trial with a long-term clinical endpoint.

In RCTs with an interest in a long-term efficacy endpoint, the follow-up time necessary to observe the endpoint may be substantial. In order to reduce the expected duration of such trials, early-outcome data may be collected to enrich an interim analysis aimed at stopping the trial early for efficacy. We propose to extend such a design with an additional interim analysis using solely early-outcome data in order to expedite the evaluation of treatment's efficacy. We evaluate the potential gain in operating characteristics (power, expected trial duration, and expected sample size) when introducing such an early interim analysis, in function of the properties of the early outcome as a surrogate for the long-term endpoint. In the context of a longitudinal age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) ophthalmology trial, results show potentially substantial gains in both the expected trial duration and the expected sample size. A prerequisite, though, is that the treatment effect on the early outcome has to be strongly correlated with the treatment effect on the long-term endpoint, that is, that the early outcome is a validated surrogate for the long-term endpoint.

Assessing the impact of efficacy stopping rules on the error rates under the multi-arm multi-stage framework.

BACKGROUND: The multi-arm multi-stage framework uses intermediate outcomes to assess lack-of-benefit of research arms at interim stages in randomised trials with time-to-event outcomes. However, the design lacks formal methods to evaluate early evidence of overwhelming efficacy on the definitive outcome measure. We explore the operating characteristics of this extension to the multi-arm multi-stage design and how to control the pairwise and familywise type I error rate. Using real examples and the updated nstage program, we demonstrate how such a design can be developed in practice. METHODS: We used the Dunnett approach for assessing treatment arms when conducting comprehensive simulation studies to evaluate the familywise error rate, with and without interim efficacy looks on the definitive outcome measure, at the same time as the planned lack-of-benefit interim analyses on the intermediate outcome measure. We studied the effect of the timing of interim analyses, allocation ratio, lack-of-benefit boundaries, efficacy rule, number of stages and research arms on the operating characteristics of the design when efficacy stopping boundaries are incorporated. Methods for controlling the familywise error rate with efficacy looks were also addressed. RESULTS: Incorporating Haybittle-Peto stopping boundaries on the definitive outcome at the interim analyses will not inflate the familywise error rate in a multi-arm design with two stages. However, this rule is conservative; in general, more liberal stopping boundaries can be used with minimal impact on the familywise error rate. Efficacy bounds in trials with three or more stages using an intermediate outcome may inflate the familywise error rate, but we show how to maintain strong control. CONCLUSION: The multi-arm multi-stage design allows stopping for both lack-of-benefit on the intermediate outcome and efficacy on the definitive outcome at the interim stages. We provide guidelines on how to control the familywise error rate when efficacy boundaries are implemented in practice.

Design and monitoring of multi-arm multi-stage clinical trials.

Two-arm group sequential designs have been widely used for over 40 years, especially for studies with mortality endpoints. The natural generalization of such designs to trials with multiple treatment arms and a common control (MAMS designs) has, however, been implemented rarely. While the statistical methodology for this extension is clear, the main limitation has been an efficient way to perform the computations. Past efforts were hampered by algorithms that were computationally explosive. With the increasing interest in adaptive designs, platform designs, and other innovative designs that involve multiple comparisons over multiple stages, the importance of MAMS designs is growing rapidly. This article provides break-through algorithms that can compute MAMS boundaries rapidly thereby making such designs practical. For designs with efficacy-only boundaries the computational effort increases linearly with number of arms and number of stages. For designs with both efficacy and futility boundaries the computational effort doubles with successive increases in number of stages.