Abstract:IMPORTANCE The cohort size of phase 1 clinical trials and thus the timing of the interim decisions are typically prespecified in the trial protocol. During trial implementation, however, the cohort size often deviates from the planned one, which shifts the schedule of the interims. Despite its pervasiveness in phase 1 trials, the association of cohort size deviation with the operating characteristics of these trials is not clear. OBJECTIVE To explore the association between cohort size deviation and the operating characteristics of phase 1 clinical trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this cross-sectional simulation study, a review was conducted of 102 phase 1 dose-escalation trials published between January 2017 and May 2018 in 3 peer-reviewed journals (Journal of Clinical Oncology, Clinical Cancer Research, and Cancer). After exclusion of studies that did not report the cohort size, 45 trials remained for analysis. Based on the analysis results, a simulation study was performed to systematically investigate the association of cohort size deviation with the operating characteristics of the trials. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The prevalence of cohort size deviation and the percentage of correct selection of the maximum tolerated dose. RESULTS Of the 45 reviewed trials, 10 (22.2%) adhered strictly to the planned cohort size. The simulation study showed that when cohort size deviation was random, it had little association with the performance of novel model-based and model-assisted designs (mean reduction in the percentage of correct selection of the maximum tolerated dose was 0.87 percentage point for the continual reassessment method and 0.84 percentage point for the bayesian optimal interval design). When the cohort size deviation was informative and made based on the observed data on toxicity (eg, if dose-limiting toxicity was observed, the size of the next or current cohort was reduced or expanded), the variation of the design performance increased. The range of the change in the percentage of correct selection was -3.7 to 1.3 percentage points for the continual reassessment method and -4.5 to 0 percentage points for the bayesian optimal interval design. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The findings suggest that when novel phase 1 clinical trial designs are used, some cohort size deviation is acceptable and has little association with the performance of the designs. These deviations may be used by expert investigators to properly interpret the data, ensure safety, and leverage flexibility in the protocol.

A systematic approach to adaptive sequential design for clinical trials: using simulations to select a design with desired operating characteristics

Adaptive two-stage seamless sequential design for clinical trials

BASIC: A Bayesian Adaptive Synthetic-Control Design for Phase II Clinical Trials.

A Bayesian Group Sequential Design for Randomized Biosimilar Clinical Trials with Adaptive Information Borrowing from Historical Data

Adaptive Designs for Sequential Experiments

An Adaptive Trial Design to Optimize Dose-Schedule Regimes with Delayed Outcomes

Seamless phase II/III clinical trials using early outcomes for treatment or subgroup selection: Methods and aspects of their implementation

Adaptive sequential design for phase II single-arm oncology trials: an expansion of Simon's design

AIDE: Adaptive intrapatient dose escalation designs to accelerate Phase I clinical trials

Sample size adaptation designs and efficiency comparison with group sequential designs

Sequential Continual Reassessment Method for Two-Dimensional Dose Finding.

Evaluation of Deviation from Planned Cohort Size and Operating Characteristics of Phase 1 Trials

Efficient and flexible simulation-based sample size determination for clinical trials with multiple design parameters

The asymptotic theorems of adaptive designs for clinical trials with generations depending on the estimated success rates

Sensitivity Analyses of Clinical Trial Designs: Selecting Scenarios and Summarizing Operating Characteristics

Seamless Phase II/III Design: a Useful Strategy to Reduce the Sample Size for Dose Optimization

Conditional Power and Friends: The Why and How of (Un)planned, Unblinded Sample Size Recalculations in Confirmatory Trials

Reporting and communication of sample size calculations in adaptive clinical trials: a review of trial protocols and grant applications

Adaptive Hybrid Control Design for Comparative Clinical Trials with Historical Control Data

A Calibrated Power Prior Approach to Borrow Information from Historical Data with Application to Biosimilar Clinical Trials.

Potential outcome simulation for efficient head-to-head comparison of adaptive dose-finding designs