IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v74y2018i1p49-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Covariate†adjusted response†adaptive randomization for multi†arm clinical trials using a modified forward looking Gittins index rule

Author

Listed:
  • Sofía S. Villar
  • William F. Rosenberger

Abstract

We introduce a non†myopic, covariate†adjusted response adaptive (CARA) allocation design for multi†armed clinical trials. The allocation scheme is a computationally tractable procedure based on the Gittins index solution to the classic multi†armed bandit problem and extends the procedure recently proposed in Villar et al. (2015). Our proposed CARA randomization procedure is defined by reformulating the bandit problem with covariates into a classic bandit problem in which there are multiple combination arms, considering every arm per each covariate category as a distinct treatment arm. We then apply a heuristically modified Gittins index rule to solve the problem and define allocation probabilities from the resulting solution. We report the efficiency, balance, and ethical performance of our approach compared to existing CARA methods using a recently published clinical trial as motivation. The net savings in terms of expected number of treatment failures is considerably larger and probably enough to make this design attractive for certain studies where known covariates are expected to be important, stratification is not desired, treatment failures have a high ethical cost, and the disease under study is rare. In a two†armed context, this patient benefit advantage comes at the expense of increased variability in the allocation proportions and a reduction in statistical power. However, in a multi†armed context, simple modifications of the proposed CARA rule can be incorporated so that an ethical advantage can be offered without sacrificing power in comparison with balanced designs.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofía S. Villar & William F. Rosenberger, 2018. "Covariate†adjusted response†adaptive randomization for multi†arm clinical trials using a modified forward looking Gittins index rule," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 49-57, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:74:y:2018:i:1:p:49-57
    DOI: 10.1111/biom.12738
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.12738
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/biom.12738?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tymofyeyev, Yevgen & Rosenberger, William F. & Hu, Feifang, 2007. "Implementing Optimal Allocation in Sequential Binary Response Experiments," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 224-234, March.
    2. Williamson, S. Faye & Jacko, Peter & Villar, Sofía S. & Jaki, Thomas, 2017. "A Bayesian adaptive design for clinical trials in rare diseases," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 136-153.
    3. William F. Rosenberger & Nigel Stallard & Anastasia Ivanova & Cherice N. Harper & Michelle L. Ricks, 2001. "Optimal Adaptive Designs for Binary Response Trials," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 909-913, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Helen Yvette Barnett & Sofía S. Villar & Helena Geys & Thomas Jaki, 2023. "A novel statistical test for treatment differences in clinical trials using a response‐adaptive forward‐looking Gittins Index Rule," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(1), pages 86-97, March.
    2. Williamson, S. Faye & Jacko, Peter & Jaki, Thomas, 2022. "Generalisations of a Bayesian decision-theoretic randomisation procedure and the impact of delayed responses," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    3. Kasianova, Ksenia & Kelbert, Mark & Mozgunov, Pavel, 2021. "Response adaptive designs for Phase II trials with binary endpoint based on context-dependent information measures," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    4. Waverly Wei & Xinwei Ma & Jingshen Wang, 2023. "Fair Adaptive Experiments," Papers 2310.16290, arXiv.org.
    5. Amir Ali Nasrollahzadeh & Amin Khademi, 2022. "Dynamic Programming for Response-Adaptive Dose-Finding Clinical Trials," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 1176-1190, March.
    6. Andres Alban & Stephen E. Chick & Martin Forster, 2023. "Value-Based Clinical Trials: Selecting Recruitment Rates and Trial Lengths in Different Regulatory Contexts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3516-3535, June.
    7. Stephen E. Chick & Noah Gans & Özge Yapar, 2022. "Bayesian Sequential Learning for Clinical Trials of Multiple Correlated Medical Interventions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 4919-4938, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alessandro Baldi Antognini & Marco Novelli & Maroussa Zagoraiou, 2022. "A simple solution to the inadequacy of asymptotic likelihood-based inference for response-adaptive clinical trials," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 157-180, February.
    2. Yanqing Yi & Yuan Yuan, 2013. "An optimal allocation for response-adaptive designs," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(9), pages 1996-2008, September.
    3. Chambaz Antoine & van der Laan Mark J., 2011. "Targeting the Optimal Design in Randomized Clinical Trials with Binary Outcomes and No Covariate: Theoretical Study," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, January.
    4. Jianhua Hu & Hongjian Zhu & Feifang Hu, 2015. "A Unified Family of Covariate-Adjusted Response-Adaptive Designs Based on Efficiency and Ethics," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(509), pages 357-367, March.
    5. Uttam Bandyopadhyay & Rahul Bhattacharya, 2009. "Response adaptive procedures with dual optimality," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 63(3), pages 353-367, August.
    6. Yi, Yanqing & Wang, Xikui, 2023. "A Markov decision process for response adaptive designs," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 125-133.
    7. Uttam Bandyopadhyay & Atanu Biswas & Shirsendu Mukherjee, 2009. "Adaptive two-treatment two-period crossover design for binary treatment responses incorporating carry-over effects," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 18(1), pages 13-33, March.
    8. Hengtao Zhang & Guosheng Yin, 2021. "Response‐adaptive rerandomization," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1281-1298, November.
    9. Helen Yvette Barnett & Sofía S. Villar & Helena Geys & Thomas Jaki, 2023. "A novel statistical test for treatment differences in clinical trials using a response‐adaptive forward‐looking Gittins Index Rule," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(1), pages 86-97, March.
    10. Hanan Hammouri & Marwan Alquran & Ruwa Abdel Muhsen & Jaser Altahat, 2022. "Optimal Weighted Multiple-Testing Procedure for Clinical Trials," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, June.
    11. Biswas, Atanu & Bhattacharya, Rahul, 2010. "An optimal response-adaptive design with dual constraints," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(3-4), pages 177-185, February.
    12. Atkinson, Anthony C. & Biswas, Atanu, 2017. "Optimal response and covariate-adaptive biased-coin designs for clinical trials with continuous multivariate or longitudinal responses," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 66761, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Jennifer Proper & Thomas A. Murray, 2023. "An alternative metric for evaluating the potential patient benefit of response‐adaptive randomization procedures," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 1433-1445, June.
    14. Li-Xin, Zhang, 2006. "Asymptotic results on a class of adaptive multi-treatment designs," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 586-605, March.
    15. Mandal, Saumen & Biswas, Atanu & Trandafir, Paula Camelia & Islam Chowdhury, Mohammad Ziaul, 2013. "Optimal target allocation proportion for correlated binary responses in a 2×2 setup," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 83(9), pages 1991-1997.
    16. Williamson, S. Faye & Jacko, Peter & Jaki, Thomas, 2022. "Generalisations of a Bayesian decision-theoretic randomisation procedure and the impact of delayed responses," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    17. Waverly Wei & Xinwei Ma & Jingshen Wang, 2023. "Fair Adaptive Experiments," Papers 2310.16290, arXiv.org.
    18. Jeffrey A. Mills & Gary Cornwall & Beau A. Sauley & Jeffrey R. Strawn, 2018. "Improving the Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials: a Posterior Simulation Approach," BEA Working Papers 0157, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
    19. Lanju Zhang & William F. Rosenberger, 2006. "Response-Adaptive Randomization for Clinical Trials with Continuous Outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 562-569, June.
    20. Yuan, Ao & Chai, Gen Xiang, 2008. "Optimal adaptive generalized Polya urn design for multi-arm clinical trials," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 1-24, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:74:y:2018:i:1:p:49-57. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0006-341X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.