• We consider two problems that are attracting increasing attention in clinical dose finding studies. First, we assess the similarity of two non-linear regression models for two non-overlapping subgroups of patients over a restricted covariate space. To this end, we derive a confidence interval for the maximum difference between the two given models. If this confidence interval excludes the equivalence margins, similarity of dose response can be claimed. Second, we address the problem of demonstrating the similarity of two target doses for two non-overlapping subgroups, using again a confidence interval based approach. We illustrate the proposed methods with a real case study and investigate their operating characteristics (coverage probabilities, Type I error rates, power) via simulation.
  • This paper investigates the problem whether the difference between two parametric models $m_1,m_2$ describing the relation between a response variable and several covariates in two different groups is practically irrelevant, such that inference can be performed on the basis of the pooled sample. Statistical methodology is developed to test the hypotheses $H_0 : d(m_1,m_2)\geq \epsilon$ versus $H_1 : d(m_1,m_2) < \epsilon$ to demonstrate equivalence between the two regression curves $m_1,m_2$ for a pre-specified threshold $\epsilon$, where $d$ denotes a distance measuring the distance between $m_1$ and $m_2$. Our approach is based on the asymptotic properties of a suitable estimator $d(\hat{m}_1; \hat{m}_2)$ of this distance. In order to improve the approximation of the nominal level for small sample sizes a bootstrap test is developed, which addresses the specific form of the interval hypotheses. In particular, data has to be generated under the null hypothesis, which implicitly defines a manifold for the parameter vector. The results are illustrated by means of a simulation study and a data example. It is demonstrated that the new methods substantially improve currently available approaches with respect to power and approximation of the nominal level.
  • We describe a general framework for weighted parametric multiple test procedures based on the closure principle. We utilize general weighting strategies that can reflect complex study objectives and include many procedures in the literature as special cases. The proposed weighted parametric tests bridge the gap between rejection rules using either adjusted significance levels or adjusted $p$-values. This connection is possible by allowing intersection hypotheses to be tested at level smaller than $\alpha$, which may be needed for certain study considerations. For such cases we introduce a subclass of exact $\alpha$-level parametric tests which satisfy the consonance property. When only subsets of test statistics are correlated, a new procedure is proposed to fully utilize the parametric assumptions within each subset. We illustrate the proposed weighted parametric tests using a clinical trial example.
  • Nonlinear regression models addressing both efficacy and toxicity outcomes are increasingly used in dose-finding trials, such as in pharmaceutical drug development. However, research on related experimental design problems for corresponding active controlled trials is still scarce. In this paper we derive optimal designs to estimate efficacy and toxicity in an active controlled clinical dose finding trial when the bivariate continuous outcomes are modeled either by polynomials up to degree 2, the Michaelis- Menten model, the Emax model, or a combination thereof. We determine upper bounds on the number of different doses levels required for the optimal design and provide conditions under which the boundary points of the design space are included in the optimal design. We also provide an analytical description of the minimally supported $D$-optimal designs and show that they do not depend on the correlation between the bivariate outcomes. We illustrate the proposed methods with numerical examples and demonstrate the advantages of the $D$-optimal design for a trial, which has recently been considered in the literature.
  • Phase II dose finding studies in clinical drug development are typically conducted to adequately characterize the dose response relationship of a new drug. An important decision is then on the choice of a suitable dose response function to support dose selection for the subsequent Phase III studies. In this paper we compare different approaches for model selection and model averaging using mathematical properties as well as simulations. Accordingly, we review and illustrate asymptotic properties of model selection criteria and investigate their behavior when changing the sample size but keeping the effect size constant. In a large scale simulation study we investigate how the various approaches perform in realistically chosen settings. Finally, the different methods are illustrated with a recently conducted Phase II dosefinding study in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
  • In a recent paper Dette et al. (2014) introduced optimal design problems for dose fnding studies with an active control. These authors concentrated on regression models with normal distributed errors (with known variance) and the problem of determining optimal designs for estimating the smallest dose, which achieves the same treatment effect as the active control. This paper discusses the problem of designing active-controlled dose fnding studies from a broader perspective. In particular, we consider a general class of optimality criteria and models arising from an exponential family, which are frequently used analyzing count data. We investigate under which circumstances optimal designs for dose fnding studies including a placebo can be used to obtain optimal designs for studies with an active control. Optimal designs are constructed for several situations and the differences arising from different distributional assumptions are investigated in detail. In particular, our results are applicable for constructing optimal experimental designs to analyze active-controlled dose fnding studies with discrete data, and we illustrate the efficiency of the new optimal designs with two recent examples from our consulting projects.
  • Statistical methodology for the design and analysis of clinical Phase II dose response studies, with related software implementation, are well developed for the case of a normally distributed, homoscedastic response considered for a single timepoint in parallel group study designs. In practice, however, binary, count, or time-to-event endpoints are often used, typically measured repeatedly over time and sometimes in more complex settings like crossover study designs. In this paper we develop an overarching methodology to perform efficient multiple comparisons and modeling for dose finding, under uncertainty about the dose-response shape, using general parametric models. The framework described here is quite general and covers dose finding using generalized non-linear models, linear and non-linear mixed effects models, Cox proportional hazards (PH) models, etc. In addition to the core framework, we also develop a general purpose methodology to fit dose response data in a computationally and statistically efficient way. Several examples, using a variety of different statistical models, illustrate the breadth of applicability of the results. For the analyses we developed the R add-on package DoseFinding, which provides a convenient interface to the general approach adopted here.
  • Dose-finding studies are frequently conducted to evaluate the effect of different doses or concentration levels of a compound on a response of interest. Applications include the investigation of a new medicinal drug, a herbicide or fertilizer, a molecular entity, an environmental toxin, or an industrial chemical. In pharmaceutical drug development, dose-finding studies are of critical importance because of regulatory requirements that marketed doses are safe and provide clinically relevant efficacy. Motivated by a dose-finding study in moderate persistent asthma, we propose response-adaptive designs addressing two major challenges in dose-finding studies: uncertainty about the dose-response models and large variability in parameter estimates. To allocate new cohorts of patients in an ongoing study, we use optimal designs that are robust under model uncertainty. In addition, we use a Bayesian shrinkage approach to stabilize the parameter estimates over the successive interim analyses used in the adaptations. This approach allows us to calculate updated parameter estimates and model probabilities that can then be used to calculate the optimal design for subsequent cohorts. The resulting designs are hence robust with respect to model misspecification and additionally can efficiently adapt to the information accrued in an ongoing study. We focus on adaptive designs for estimating the minimum effective dose, although alternative optimality criteria or mixtures thereof could be used, enabling the design to address multiple objectives.