z-logo
Premium
Testing of evaluation bias for progression free survival endpoint in oncology clinical trials
Author(s) -
Sun Yan,
Wu Wenting,
Sargent Daniel
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
statistics in medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.996
H-Index - 183
eISSN - 1097-0258
pISSN - 0277-6715
DOI - 10.1002/sim.6963
Subject(s) - sample size determination , progression free survival , clinical trial , clinical endpoint , computer science , type i and type ii errors , audit , medicine , index (typography) , oncology , medical physics , statistics , overall survival , mathematics , accounting , business , world wide web
Progression‐free survival is an increasingly popular end point in oncology clinical trials. A complete blinded independent central review (BICR) is often required by regulators in an attempt to reduce the bias in progression‐free survival (PFS) assessment. In this paper, we propose a new methodology that uses a sample‐based BICR as an audit tool to decide whether a complete BICR is needed. More specifically, we propose a new index, the differential risk, to measure the reading discordance pattern, and develop a corresponding hypothesis testing procedure to decide whether the bias in local evaluation is acceptable. Simulation results demonstrate that our new index is sensitive to the change of discordance pattern; type I error is well controlled in the hypothesis testing procedure, and the calculated sample size provides the desired power. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom