Decision making during a Phase III randomized controlled trial

Experiments such as clinical trials should be carried out with specific objectives. For example, in a trial designed to prevent disease, specific considerations should be made concerning the impact of the trial on the health of the target population, including the participants in the trial. These ob...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Controlled clinical trials 1994-10, Vol.15 (5), p.360-378
Hauptverfasser: Berry, Donald A., Wolff, Mark C., Sack, David
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 378
container_issue 5
container_start_page 360
container_title Controlled clinical trials
container_volume 15
creator Berry, Donald A.
Wolff, Mark C.
Sack, David
description Experiments such as clinical trials should be carried out with specific objectives. For example, in a trial designed to prevent disease, specific considerations should be made concerning the impact of the trial on the health of the target population, including the participants in the trial. These objectives should be assessed continually in light of data accumulating from the trial. Accumulating evidence should be judged in the context of changing circumstances external to the trial, and the trial's design possibly modified. An important type of modification is stopping the trial. This is a sequential decision problem that can be addressed using a Bayesian approach and the methods of dynamic programming. As an example we consider a vaccine trial for the prevention of haemophilus influenzae type b. The objective we consider is minimizing the number of cases of this disease in a Native American population over a specified horizon. We assess the prior probability distribution of vaccine efficacy. We also assess the probability of regulatory approval for widespread use of the vaccine, depending on the data presented to the regulatory officials. In deciding whether to continue the trial we weigh the impact of the possible future results by their (predictive) probabilities. We address the sensitivity of the optimal stopping policy to the priorprobability distribution, to the assessed probability of regulatory approval, and to the horizon.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/0197-2456(94)90033-7
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_76894222</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>0197245694900337</els_id><sourcerecordid>76894222</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-22788788ebc85b0b6ba47fd41e80d1c4eea8e4c121a2c92084c11f4275976ad73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9LxDAQxYMo67r6DRR6Ej1UkzRt0suCrP8KC3pQ8BbSZKrRtlmTVtBPb-suexQGZmDevMf8EDom-IJgkl1ikvOYsjQ7y9l5jnGSxHwHTYngeYxT_LKLplvJPjoI4R1jnJKMTdBEYEySlE_R_Bq0Dda1UaM-bPsamd6PTUWPbypAVBRF5FVrXGN_wETatZ13dT2MnbeqPkR7laoDHG36DD3f3jwt7uPlw12xuFrGekjpYkq5EENBqUVa4jIrFeOVYQQENkQzACWAaUKJojqnWAwzqRjlac4zZXgyQ6dr35V3nz2ETjY2aKhr1YLrg-SZyBmldBCytVB7F4KHSq68bZT_lgTLEZscmciRicyZ_MMmR_-TjX9fNmC2RxtOw36-3sPw5JcFL4O20Gow1oPupHH2_4Bf9dN63w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>76894222</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Decision making during a Phase III randomized controlled trial</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Berry, Donald A. ; Wolff, Mark C. ; Sack, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Berry, Donald A. ; Wolff, Mark C. ; Sack, David</creatorcontrib><description>Experiments such as clinical trials should be carried out with specific objectives. For example, in a trial designed to prevent disease, specific considerations should be made concerning the impact of the trial on the health of the target population, including the participants in the trial. These objectives should be assessed continually in light of data accumulating from the trial. Accumulating evidence should be judged in the context of changing circumstances external to the trial, and the trial's design possibly modified. An important type of modification is stopping the trial. This is a sequential decision problem that can be addressed using a Bayesian approach and the methods of dynamic programming. As an example we consider a vaccine trial for the prevention of haemophilus influenzae type b. The objective we consider is minimizing the number of cases of this disease in a Native American population over a specified horizon. We assess the prior probability distribution of vaccine efficacy. We also assess the probability of regulatory approval for widespread use of the vaccine, depending on the data presented to the regulatory officials. In deciding whether to continue the trial we weigh the impact of the possible future results by their (predictive) probabilities. We address the sensitivity of the optimal stopping policy to the priorprobability distribution, to the assessed probability of regulatory approval, and to the horizon.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0197-2456</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-050X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(94)90033-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8001357</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>assessing prior information ; Bayes Theorem ; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic - methods ; decision analysis ; Decision Support Techniques ; Double-Blind Method ; Drug Evaluation ; dynamic programming ; Haemophilus Infections - prevention &amp; control ; Haemophilus influenzae ; Haemophilus Vaccines - therapeutic use ; Humans ; Indians, North American ; Infant ; Monitoring randomized clinical trials ; optimal stopping ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods ; sequential design ; Southwestern United States ; Treatment Outcome ; weighing information gain with effective therapy</subject><ispartof>Controlled clinical trials, 1994-10, Vol.15 (5), p.360-378</ispartof><rights>1994</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-22788788ebc85b0b6ba47fd41e80d1c4eea8e4c121a2c92084c11f4275976ad73</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8001357$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Berry, Donald A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolff, Mark C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sack, David</creatorcontrib><title>Decision making during a Phase III randomized controlled trial</title><title>Controlled clinical trials</title><addtitle>Control Clin Trials</addtitle><description>Experiments such as clinical trials should be carried out with specific objectives. For example, in a trial designed to prevent disease, specific considerations should be made concerning the impact of the trial on the health of the target population, including the participants in the trial. These objectives should be assessed continually in light of data accumulating from the trial. Accumulating evidence should be judged in the context of changing circumstances external to the trial, and the trial's design possibly modified. An important type of modification is stopping the trial. This is a sequential decision problem that can be addressed using a Bayesian approach and the methods of dynamic programming. As an example we consider a vaccine trial for the prevention of haemophilus influenzae type b. The objective we consider is minimizing the number of cases of this disease in a Native American population over a specified horizon. We assess the prior probability distribution of vaccine efficacy. We also assess the probability of regulatory approval for widespread use of the vaccine, depending on the data presented to the regulatory officials. In deciding whether to continue the trial we weigh the impact of the possible future results by their (predictive) probabilities. We address the sensitivity of the optimal stopping policy to the priorprobability distribution, to the assessed probability of regulatory approval, and to the horizon.</description><subject>assessing prior information</subject><subject>Bayes Theorem</subject><subject>Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic - methods</subject><subject>decision analysis</subject><subject>Decision Support Techniques</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Drug Evaluation</subject><subject>dynamic programming</subject><subject>Haemophilus Infections - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Haemophilus influenzae</subject><subject>Haemophilus Vaccines - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Indians, North American</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Monitoring randomized clinical trials</subject><subject>optimal stopping</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</subject><subject>sequential design</subject><subject>Southwestern United States</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>weighing information gain with effective therapy</subject><issn>0197-2456</issn><issn>1879-050X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1994</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE9LxDAQxYMo67r6DRR6Ej1UkzRt0suCrP8KC3pQ8BbSZKrRtlmTVtBPb-suexQGZmDevMf8EDom-IJgkl1ikvOYsjQ7y9l5jnGSxHwHTYngeYxT_LKLplvJPjoI4R1jnJKMTdBEYEySlE_R_Bq0Dda1UaM-bPsamd6PTUWPbypAVBRF5FVrXGN_wETatZ13dT2MnbeqPkR7laoDHG36DD3f3jwt7uPlw12xuFrGekjpYkq5EENBqUVa4jIrFeOVYQQENkQzACWAaUKJojqnWAwzqRjlac4zZXgyQ6dr35V3nz2ETjY2aKhr1YLrg-SZyBmldBCytVB7F4KHSq68bZT_lgTLEZscmciRicyZ_MMmR_-TjX9fNmC2RxtOw36-3sPw5JcFL4O20Gow1oPupHH2_4Bf9dN63w</recordid><startdate>19941001</startdate><enddate>19941001</enddate><creator>Berry, Donald A.</creator><creator>Wolff, Mark C.</creator><creator>Sack, David</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19941001</creationdate><title>Decision making during a Phase III randomized controlled trial</title><author>Berry, Donald A. ; Wolff, Mark C. ; Sack, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-22788788ebc85b0b6ba47fd41e80d1c4eea8e4c121a2c92084c11f4275976ad73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1994</creationdate><topic>assessing prior information</topic><topic>Bayes Theorem</topic><topic>Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic - methods</topic><topic>decision analysis</topic><topic>Decision Support Techniques</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Drug Evaluation</topic><topic>dynamic programming</topic><topic>Haemophilus Infections - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Haemophilus influenzae</topic><topic>Haemophilus Vaccines - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Indians, North American</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Monitoring randomized clinical trials</topic><topic>optimal stopping</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</topic><topic>sequential design</topic><topic>Southwestern United States</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>weighing information gain with effective therapy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Berry, Donald A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolff, Mark C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sack, David</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Controlled clinical trials</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Berry, Donald A.</au><au>Wolff, Mark C.</au><au>Sack, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Decision making during a Phase III randomized controlled trial</atitle><jtitle>Controlled clinical trials</jtitle><addtitle>Control Clin Trials</addtitle><date>1994-10-01</date><risdate>1994</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>360</spage><epage>378</epage><pages>360-378</pages><issn>0197-2456</issn><eissn>1879-050X</eissn><abstract>Experiments such as clinical trials should be carried out with specific objectives. For example, in a trial designed to prevent disease, specific considerations should be made concerning the impact of the trial on the health of the target population, including the participants in the trial. These objectives should be assessed continually in light of data accumulating from the trial. Accumulating evidence should be judged in the context of changing circumstances external to the trial, and the trial's design possibly modified. An important type of modification is stopping the trial. This is a sequential decision problem that can be addressed using a Bayesian approach and the methods of dynamic programming. As an example we consider a vaccine trial for the prevention of haemophilus influenzae type b. The objective we consider is minimizing the number of cases of this disease in a Native American population over a specified horizon. We assess the prior probability distribution of vaccine efficacy. We also assess the probability of regulatory approval for widespread use of the vaccine, depending on the data presented to the regulatory officials. In deciding whether to continue the trial we weigh the impact of the possible future results by their (predictive) probabilities. We address the sensitivity of the optimal stopping policy to the priorprobability distribution, to the assessed probability of regulatory approval, and to the horizon.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>8001357</pmid><doi>10.1016/0197-2456(94)90033-7</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0197-2456
ispartof Controlled clinical trials, 1994-10, Vol.15 (5), p.360-378
issn 0197-2456
1879-050X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_76894222
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects assessing prior information
Bayes Theorem
Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic - methods
decision analysis
Decision Support Techniques
Double-Blind Method
Drug Evaluation
dynamic programming
Haemophilus Infections - prevention & control
Haemophilus influenzae
Haemophilus Vaccines - therapeutic use
Humans
Indians, North American
Infant
Monitoring randomized clinical trials
optimal stopping
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods
sequential design
Southwestern United States
Treatment Outcome
weighing information gain with effective therapy
title Decision making during a Phase III randomized controlled trial
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T20%3A11%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Decision%20making%20during%20a%20Phase%20III%20randomized%20controlled%20trial&rft.jtitle=Controlled%20clinical%20trials&rft.au=Berry,%20Donald%20A.&rft.date=1994-10-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=360&rft.epage=378&rft.pages=360-378&rft.issn=0197-2456&rft.eissn=1879-050X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0197-2456(94)90033-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E76894222%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=76894222&rft_id=info:pmid/8001357&rft_els_id=0197245694900337&rfr_iscdi=true