Loading…

Three-component cure rate model for nonproportional hazards alternative in the design of randomized clinical trials

Background Cure rate models have been extensively studied and widely used in time-to-event data in cancer clinical trials. Purpose Although cure rate models based on the generalized exponential distribution have been developed, they have not been used in the design of randomized cancer clinical tria...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical trials (London, England) England), 2012-04, Vol.9 (2), p.155-163
Main Authors: Kim, Haesook Teresa, Gray, Robert
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Cure rate models have been extensively studied and widely used in time-to-event data in cancer clinical trials. Purpose Although cure rate models based on the generalized exponential distribution have been developed, they have not been used in the design of randomized cancer clinical trials, which instead have relied exclusively on two-component exponential cure rate model with a proportional hazards (PH) alternative. In some studies, the efficacy of the experimental treatment is expected to emerge some time after randomization. Since this does not conform to a PH alternative, such studies require a more flexible model to describe the alternative hypothesis. Methods In this article, we report the study design of a phase III clinical trial of acute myeloid leukemia using a three-component exponential cure rate model to reflect the alternative hypothesis. A newly developed power calculation program that does not require PH assumption was used. Results Using a custom-made three-component cure rate model as an alternative hypothesis, the proposed sample size was 409, compared with a sample size of 209 under the assumption of exponential distribution and 228 under the PH alternative. A simulation study was performed to present the degree of power loss when the alternative hypothesis is not appropriately specified. Limitations The power calculation program used in this study is for a single analysis and does not account for group sequential tests in phase III trials. However, the loss in power is small, and this was handled by inflating the sample size by 5%. Conclusion Misspecification of the alternative hypothesis can result in a seriously underpowered study. We report examples of clinical trials that required a custom-made alternative hypothesis to reflect a later indication of experimental treatment efficacy. The proposed three-component cure rate model could be very useful for specifying non-PH alternative.
ISSN:1740-7745
1740-7753
DOI:10.1177/1740774512436614