Abstract:Seamless phase 2/3 design has become increasingly popular in clinical trials with a single endpoint. Trials that define success based on the achievement of all co-primary endpoints (CPEs) encounter the challenge of inflated type 2 error rates, often leading to an overly large sample size. To tackle this challenge, we introduced a seamless phase 2/3 design strategy that employs Bayesian predictive power (BPP) for futility monitoring and sample size re-estimation at interim analysis. The correlations among multiple CPEs are incorporated using a Dirichlet-multinomial distribution. An alternative approach based on conditional power (CP) was also discussed for comparison. A seamless phase 2/3 vaccine trial employing four binary endpoints under the non-inferior hypothesis serves as an example. Our results spotlight that, in scenarios with relatively small phase 2 sample sizes (e.g., 50 or 100 subjects), the BPP approach either outperforms or matches the CP approach in terms of overall power. Particularly, with n 1 = 50 and ρ = 0, BPP showcases an overall power advantage over CP by as much as 8.54%. Furthermore, when the phase 2 stage enrolled more subjects (e.g., 150 or 200), especially with a phase 2 sample size of 200 and ρ = 0, the BPP approach evidences a peak difference of 5.76% in early stop probability over the CP approach, emphasizing its better efficiency in terminating futile trials. It's noteworthy that both BPP and CP methodologies maintained type 1 error rates under 2.5%. In conclusion, the integration of the Dirichlet-Multinominal model with the BPP approach offers improvement in certain scenarios over the CP approach for seamless phase 2/3 trials with multiple CPEs.

Enhancing the flexibility and power of adaptive seamless phase 2/3 design with copula modeling between short-term and long-term endpoints

An adaptive seamless 2-in-1 design with biomarker-driven subgroup enrichment

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

Using Surrogate Endpoints in Adaptive Designs with Delayed Treatment Effect

A Bayesian Phase II Proof-of-concept Design for Clinical Trials with Longitudinal Endpoints.

Incorporating Historical Information to Improve Phase I Clinical Trials

BOP2: Bayesian Optimal Design for Phase II Clinical Trials with Simple and Complex Endpoints.

Flexible seamless 2-in-1 design with sample size adaptation

Adaptive two-stage seamless sequential design for clinical trials

A Bayesian Piecewise Exponential Phase II Design for Monitoring a Time‐to‐event Endpoint

Bayesian Phase II Adaptive Randomization by Jointly Modeling Time-to-event Efficacy and Binary Toxicity

Using Data Augmentation to Facilitate Conduct of Phase I-Ii Clinical Trials with Delayed Outcomes

Two-phase designs with failure time processes subject to nonsusceptibility

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

Seamless phase 2/3 design for trials with multiple co-primary endpoints using Bayesian predictive power

Bayesian Dose Finding by Jointly Modelling Toxicity and Efficacy As Time-To-Event Outcomes

A Bayesian Design for Phase II Clinical Trials with Delayed Responses Based on Multiple Imputation.

Analysis of innovative two-stage seamless adaptive design with different endpoints and population shift

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

Optimizing Interim Analysis Timing for Bayesian Adaptive Commensurate Designs

Integrating Phase 2 into Phase 3 based on an Intermediate Endpoint While Accounting for a Cure Proportion -- with an Application to the Design of a Clinical Trial in Acute Myeloid Leukemia