Adding flexibility to clinical trial designs: an example-based guide to the practical use of adaptive designs

Abstract

Adaptive designs for clinical trials permit alterations to a study in response to accumulating data in order to make trials more flexible, ethical, and efficient. These benefits are achieved while preserving the integrity and validity of the trial, through the pre-specification and proper adjustment for the possible alterations during the course of the trial. Despite much research in the statistical literature highlighting the potential advantages of adaptive designs over traditional fixed designs, the uptake of such methods in clinical research has been slow. One major reason for this is that different adaptations to trial designs, as well as their advantages and limitations, remain unfamiliar to large parts of the clinical community. The aim of this paper is to clarify where adaptive designs can be used to address specific questions of scientific interest; we introduce the main features of adaptive designs and commonly used terminology, highlighting their utility and pitfalls, and illustrate their use through case studies of adaptive trials ranging from early-phase dose escalation to confirmatory phase III studies.

A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance

“…Researchers have many study designs to choose from, and different designs are optimally suited to consider different research questions and different circumstances 68. Extensions to standard designs of randomised controlled trials (including adaptive designs, SMART trials (sequential multiple assignment randomised trials), n-of-1 trials, and hybrid effectiveness-implementation designs) are important areas of methods development to improve the efficiency of complex intervention research 69707172. Non-randomised designs and modelling approaches might work best if a randomised design is not practical, for example, in natural experiments or systems evaluations 57374.…”

CrossTORC and WNTegration in Disease: Focus on Lymphangioleiomyomatosis

“…A difficult challenge for scientists and clinicians is to design clinical trials in an orphan disease with a small number of patients. Using the patients as their own control, or adaptive designs, as is done in many cancer trials, may give the most meaningful data and require fewer patients [ 79 , 80 ]. Overall, a better understanding of specific disease drivers, and their measurable biomarkers, and the spatial and temporal balance between growth and differentiation in subsets of cells may allow a better prediction of patients who will respond best to a particular therapy and allow more individualized therapy.…”

Practical recommendations for implementing a Bayesian adaptive phase I design during a pandemic

“…Identification of the correct dose of a treatment is an essential part of drug development. A rich literature [ 1 – 3 ] exists highlighting the benefits of model-based [ 4 – 6 ], model-assistant [ 7 , 8 ] and curve-free approaches [ 9 , 10 ] over traditional, simple rule-based methods (such as the 3 + 3 design) for recommending a dose for efficacy testing. However, the uptake of these new methods has been slow [ 11 ] and several obstacles to their use have been identified, including software, knowledge, and implementation [ 12 – 14 ].…”