Advantages of multi-arm non-randomised sequentially allocated cohort designs for Phase II oncology trials
Menée à l'aide d'une simulation, cette étude compare l'efficacité de trois types d'approches pour tester des anticancéreux dans les essais cliniques de phase II : essai simple bras, essai en deux groupes parallèles et essai séquentiel multi-bras
Background : Efficient trial designs are required to prioritise promising drugs within Phase II trials. Adaptive designs are examples of such designs, but their efficiency is reduced if there is a delay in assessing patient responses to treatment.
Methods : Motivated by the WIRE trial in renal cell carcinoma (NCT03741426), we compare three trial approaches to testing multiple treatment arms: (1) single-arm trials in sequence with interim analyses; (2) a parallel multi-arm multi-stage trial and (3) the design used in WIRE, which we call the Multi-Arm Sequential Trial with Efficient Recruitment (MASTER) design. The MASTER design recruits patients to one arm at a time, pausing recruitment to an arm when it has recruited the required number for an interim analysis. We conduct a simulation study to compare how long the three different trial designs take to evaluate a number of new treatment arms.
Results : The parallel multi-arm multi-stage and the MASTER design are much more efficient than separate trials. The MASTER design provides extra efficiency when there is endpoint delay, or recruitment is very quick.
Conclusions : We recommend the MASTER design as an efficient way of testing multiple promising cancer treatments in non-comparative Phase II trials.
British Journal of Cancer , article en libre accès, 2021