arXiv subjects

Marta Bofill Roig

Publications and source records attributed to Marta Bofill Roig.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Estimands and estimation in trials with time trends

In platform trials, model-based approaches typically estimate treatment effects conditional on calendar time. However, scientific and regulatory interest often lies in treatment effects defined for a target population spanning multiple enrollment periods, requiring explicit consideration of how effects should be averaged across time. This raises two fundamental challenges. The first is the definition of the appropriate target estimand when combining data across multiple periods. The second is the selection of the estimator to be used. In this work, we examine conditional and marginal estimands in platform trials with time trends, and describe target populations of interest. To address the second challenge, we evaluate model-based, G-computation and augmented inverse probability weighting estimators, comparing their bias and variance. We discuss how the choice of estimand, target population and trial data used for estimation affects estimator performance.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

On the inclusion of non-concurrent controls in platform trials with an interim analysis

The analysis of platform trials can be enhanced by utilizing non-concurrent controls. Since including this data might also introduce bias in the treatment effect estimators if time trends are present, methods for incorporating non-concurrent controls adjusting for time have been proposed. However, so far their behavior has not been systematically investigated in platform trials that include interim analyses. To evaluate the impact of an interim analysis in trials utilizing non-concurrent controls, we consider a platform trial featuring two experimental arms and a shared control, with the second experimental arm entering later. We focus on a frequentist regression model that uses non-concurrent controls to estimate the treatment effect of the second arm and adjusts for time using a step function to account for temporal changes. We show that performing an interim analysis in Arm 1 may introduce bias in the point estimation of the effect in Arm 2, if the regression model is used without adjustment, and investigate how the marginal bias and bias conditional on the first arm continuing after the interim depend on different trial design parameters. Moreover, we propose a new estimator of the treatment effect in Arm 2, aiming to eliminate the bias introduced by both the interim analysis in Arm 1 and the time trends, and evaluate its performance in a simulation study. The newly proposed estimator is shown to substantially reduce the bias and type I error rate inflation while leading to power gains compared to an analysis using only concurrent controls.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

An Adaptive Phase II Trial Design for Dose Selection and Addition in Microfilarial Infections

We propose a frequentist adaptive phase 2 trial design to evaluate the safety and efficacy of three treatment regimens (doses) compared to placebo for four types of helminth (worm) infections. This trial will be carried out in four Subsaharan African countries from spring 2025. Since the safety of the highest dose is not yet established, the study begins with the two lower doses and placebo. Based on safety and early efficacy results from an interim analysis, a decision will be made to either continue with the two lower doses or drop one or both and introduce the highest dose instead. This design borrows information across baskets for safety assessment, while efficacy is assessed separately for each basket. The proposed adaptive design addresses several key challenges: (1) The trial must begin with only the two lower doses because reassuring safety data from these doses is required before escalating to a higher dose. (2) Due to the expected speed of recruitment, adaptation decisions must rely on an earlier, surrogate endpoint. (3) The primary outcome is a count variable that follows a mixture distribution with an atom at 0. To control the familywise error rate in the strong sense when comparing multiple doses to the control in the adaptive design, we extend the partial conditional error approach to accommodate the inclusion of new hypotheses after the interim analysis. In a comprehensive simulation study we evaluate various design options and analysis strategies, assessing the robustness of the design under different design assumptions and parameter values. We identify scenarios where the adaptive design improves the trial's ability to identify an optimal dose. Adaptive dose selection enables resource allocation to the most promising treatment arms, increasing the likelihood of selecting the optimal dose while reducing the required overall sample size and trial duration.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2025

Statistical modeling to adjust for time trends in adaptive platform trials utilizing non-concurrent controls

Utilizing non-concurrent control data (NCC) in the analysis of late-entering arms in platform trials has recently received considerable attention. While incorporating NCC can lead to increased power and lower sample sizes, it might introduce bias to the effect estimators if temporal drifts are present. Aiming to mitigate this potential bias, we propose various frequentist model-based approaches that leverage the NCC, while adjusting for time. One of the currently available models incorporates time as a categorical fixed effect, separating the trial duration into periods, defined as time intervals bounded by any arm entering or leaving the platform. In this work, we propose two extensions of this model. First, we consider an alternative definition of time by dividing the trial into fixed-length calendar time intervals. Second, we propose alternative model-based time adjustments. Specifically, we investigate adjusting for random effects and employing splines to model time with a polynomial function. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approaches in a simulation study and illustrate their use through a case study. We show that adjusting for time via a spline function controls the type I error in trials with a sufficiently smooth time trend pattern and may lead to power gains compared to the standard fixed effect model. However, the fixed effect model with period adjustment is the most robust model for arbitrary time trends, provided that the trend is equal across all arms. Especially, in trials with sudden changes in the time trend, the period-adjustment model is preferred if NCC are included.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2024

ADDIS-Graphs for online error control with application to platform trials

In contemporary research, online error control is often required, where an error criterion, such as familywise error rate (FWER) or false discovery rate (FDR), shall remain under control while testing an a priori unbounded sequence of hypotheses. The existing online literature mainly considered large-scale designs and constructed blackbox-like algorithms for these. However, smaller studies, such as platform trials, require high flexibility and easy interpretability to take study objectives into account and facilitate the communication. Another challenge in platform trials is that due to the shared control arm some of the p-values are dependent and significance levels need to be prespecified before the decisions for all the past treatments are available. We propose ADDIS-Graphs with FWER control that due to their graphical structure perfectly adapt to such settings and provably uniformly improve the state-of-the-art method. We introduce several extensions of these ADDIS-Graphs, including the incorporation of information about the joint distribution of the p-values and a version for FDR control.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2024

Treatment-control comparisons in platform trials including non-concurrent controls

Shared controls in platform trials comprise concurrent and non-concurrent controls. For a given experimental arm, non-concurrent controls refer to data from patients allocated to the control arm before the arm enters the trial. The use of non-concurrent controls in the analysis is attractive because it may increase the trial's power of testing treatment differences while decreasing the sample size. However, since arms are added sequentially in the trial, randomization occurs at different times, which can introduce bias in the estimates due to time trends. In this article, we present methods to incorporate non-concurrent control data in treatment-control comparisons, allowing for time trends. We focus mainly on frequentist approaches that model the time trend and Bayesian strategies that limit the borrowing level depending on the heterogeneity between concurrent and non-concurrent controls. We examine the impact of time trends, overlap between experimental treatment arms and entry times of arms in the trial on the operating characteristics of treatment effect estimators for each method under different patterns for the time trends. We argue under which conditions the methods lead to type 1 error control and discuss the gain in power compared to trials only using concurrent controls by means of a simulation study in which methods are compared.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2024

An exhaustive ADDIS principle for online FWER control

In this paper we consider online multiple testing with familywise error rate (FWER) control, where the probability of committing at least one type I error shall remain under control while testing a possibly infinite sequence of hypotheses over time. Currently, Adaptive-Discard (ADDIS) procedures seem to be the most promising online procedures with FWER control in terms of power. Now, our main contribution is a uniform improvement of the ADDIS principle and thus of all ADDIS procedures. This means, the methods we propose reject as least as much hypotheses as ADDIS procedures and in some cases even more, while maintaining FWER control. In addition, we show that there is no other FWER controlling procedure that enlarges the event of rejecting any hypothesis. Finally, we apply the new principle to derive uniform improvements of the ADDIS-Spending and ADDIS-Graph.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2023

The Online Closure Principle

The closure principle is fundamental in multiple testing and has been used to derive many efficient procedures with familywise error rate control. However, it is often unsuitable for modern research, which involves flexible multiple testing settings where not all hypotheses are known at the beginning of the evaluation. In this paper, we focus on online multiple testing where a possibly infinite sequence of hypotheses is tested over time. At each step, it must be decided on the current hypothesis without having any information about the hypotheses that have not been tested yet. Our main contribution is a general and stringent mathematical definition of online multiple testing and a new online closure principle which ensures that the resulting closed procedure can be applied in the online setting. We prove that any familywise error rate controlling online procedure can be derived by this online closure principle and provide admissibility results. In addition, we demonstrate how short-cuts of these online closed procedures can be obtained under a suitable consonance property.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2023

Design Considerations for a Phase II platform trial in Major Depressive Disorder

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is one of the most common causes of disability worldwide. Unfortunately, about one-third of patients do not benefit sufficiently from available treatments and not many new drugs have been developed in this area in recent years. We thus need better and faster ways to evaluate many different treatment options quickly. Platform trials are a possible remedy - they facilitate the evaluation of more investigational treatments in a shorter period of time by sharing controls, as well as reducing clinical trial activation and recruitment times. We discuss design considerations for a platform trial in MDD, taking into account the unique disease characteristics, and present the results of extensive simulations to investigate the operating characteristics under various realistic scenarios. To allow the testing of more treatments, interim futility analyses should be performed to eliminate treatments that have either no or negligible treatment effect. Furthermore, we investigate different randomisation and allocation strategies as well as the impact of the per-treatment arm sample size. We compare the operating characteristics of such platform trials to those of traditional randomised controlled trials and highlight the potential advantages of platform trials.

stat.AP↗

arXiv2023

NCC: An R-package for analysis and simulation of platform trials with non-concurrent controls

Platform trials evaluate the efficacy of multiple treatments, allowing for late entry of the experimental arms and enabling efficiency gains by sharing controls. The power of individual treatment-control comparisons in such trials can be improved by utilizing non-concurrent controls (NCC) in the analysis. We present the R-package NCC for the design and analysis of platform trials using non-concurrent controls. NCC allows for simulating platform trials and evaluating the properties of analysis methods that make use of non-concurrent controls in a variety of settings. We describe the main NCC functions and show how to use the package to simulate and analyse platform trials by means of specific examples.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2023

Optimal allocation strategies in platform trials

Platform trials are randomized clinical trials that allow simultaneous comparison of multiple interventions, usually against a common control. Arms to test experimental interventions may enter and leave the platform over time. This implies that the number of experimental intervention arms in the trial may change over time. Determining optimal allocation rates to allocate patients to the treatment and control arms in platform trials is challenging because the change in treatment arms implies that also the optimal allocation rates will change when treatments enter or leave the platform. In addition, the optimal allocation depends on the analysis strategy used. In this paper, we derive optimal treatment allocation rates for platform trials with shared controls, assuming that a stratified estimation and testing procedure based on a regression model, is used to adjust for time trends. We consider both, analysis using concurrent controls only as well as analysis methods based on also non-concurrent controls and assume that the total sample size is fixed. The objective function to be minimized is the maximum of the variances of the effect estimators. We show that the optimal solution depends on the entry time of the arms in the trial and, in general, does not correspond to the square root of $k$ allocation rule used in the classical multi-arm trials. We illustrate the optimal allocation and evaluate the power and type 1 error rate compared to trials using one-to-one and square root of $k$ allocations by means of a case study.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2022

On the use of non-concurrent controls in platform trials: A scoping review

Platform trials gained popularity during the last few years as they increase flexibility compared to multi-arm trials by allowing new experimental arms entering when the trial already started. Using a shared control group in platform trials increases the trial efficiency compared to separate trials. Because of the later entry of some of the experimental treatment arms, the shared control group includes concurrent and non-concurrent control data. For a given experimental arm, non-concurrent controls refer to patients allocated to the control arm before the arm enters the trial, while concurrent controls refer to control patients that are randomised concurrently to the experimental arm. Using non-concurrent controls can result in bias in the estimate in case of time trends if the appropriate methodology is not used and the assumptions are not met. In this paper, we faced two main objectives. In the first, we aimed to identify the methods currently available for incorporating non-concurrent controls, clarify the key concepts and assumptions, and name the main characteristics of each method. For this purpose, we systematically searched research articles on methods to include non-concurrent controls. The second objective is to summarise the current regulatory view on non-concurrent controls to clarify the key concepts and current guidance. Therefore, we conducted a systematic search in regulatory guidelines regarding using non-concurrent controls and summarised the most relevant arguments and recommended methods. Finally, we discuss the advantages and potential caveats of using non-concurrent controls.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2022

Design of Trials with Composite Endpoints with the R Package CompAREdesign

Composite endpoints are widely used as primary endpoints in clinical trials. Designing trials with time-to-event endpoints can be particularly challenging because the proportional hazard assumption usually does not hold when using a composite endpoint, even when the premise remains true for their components. Consequently, the conventional formulae for sample size calculation do not longer apply. We present the R package CompAREdesign by means of which the key elements of trial designs, such as the sample size and effect sizes, can be computed based on the information on the composite endpoint components. CompAREdesign provides the functions to assess the sensitivity and robustness of design calculations to variations in initial values and assumptions. Furthermore, we describe other features of the package, such as functions for the design of trials with binary composite endpoints, and functions to simulate trials with composite endpoints under a wide range of scenarios.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2022

On model-based time trend adjustments in platform trials with non-concurrent controls

Platform trials can evaluate the efficacy of several treatments compared to a control. The number of treatments is not fixed, as arms may be added or removed as the trial progresses. Platform trials are more efficient than independent parallel-group trials because of using shared control groups. For arms entering the trial later, not all patients in the control group are randomised concurrently. The control group is then divided into concurrent and non-concurrent controls. Using non-concurrent controls (NCC) can improve the trial's efficiency, but can introduce bias due to time trends. We focus on a platform trial with two treatment arms and a common control arm. Assuming that the second treatment arm is added later, we assess the robustness of model-based approaches to adjust for time trends when using NCC. We consider approaches where time trends are modeled as linear or as a step function, with steps at times where arms enter or leave the trial. For trials with continuous or binary outcomes, we investigate the type 1 error (t1e) rate and power of testing the efficacy of the newly added arm under a range of scenarios. In addition to scenarios where time trends are equal across arms, we investigate settings with trends that are different or not additive in the model scale. A step function model fitted on data from all arms gives increased power while controlling the t1e, as long as the time trends are equal for the different arms and additive on the model scale. This holds even if the trend's shape deviates from a step function if block randomisation is used. But if trends differ between arms or are not additive on the model scale, t1e control may be lost. The efficiency gained by using step function models to incorporate NCC can outweigh potential biases. However, the specifics of the trial, plausibility of different time trends, and robustness of results should be considered

stat.ME↗

arXiv2022

Adaptive clinical trial designs with blinded selection of binary composite endpoints and sample size reassessment

For randomized clinical trials where a single, primary, binary endpoint would require unfeasibly large sample sizes, composite endpoints are widely chosen as the primary endpoint. Despite being commonly used, composite endpoints entail challenges in designing and interpreting results. Given that the components may be of different relevance and have different effect sizes, the choice of components must be made carefully. Especially, sample size calculations for composite binary endpoints depend not only on the anticipated effect sizes and event probabilities of the composite components, but also on the correlation between them. However, information on the correlation between endpoints is usually not reported in the literature which can be an obstacle for planning of future sound trial design. We consider two-arm randomized controlled trials with a primary composite binary endpoint and an endpoint that consists only of the clinically more important component of the composite endpoint. We propose a trial design that allows an adaptive modification of the primary endpoint based on blinded information obtained at an interim analysis. We consider a decision rule to select between a composite endpoint and its most relevant component as primary endpoint. The decision rule chooses the endpoint with the lower estimated required sample size. Additionally, the sample size is reassessed using the estimated event probabilities and correlation, and the expected effect sizes of the composite components. We investigate the statistical power and significance level under the proposed design through simulations. We show that the adaptive design is equally or more powerful than designs without adaptive modification on the primary endpoint. The targeted power is achieved even if the correlation is misspecified while maintaining the type 1 error. We illustrated the proposal by means of two case studies.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2021

Design of phase III trials with long-term survival outcomes based on short-term binary results

Pathologic complete response (pCR) is a common primary endpoint for a phase II trial or even accelerated approval of neoadjuvant cancer therapy. If granted, a two-arm confirmatory trial is often required to demonstrate the efficacy with a time-to-event outcome such as overall survival. However, the design of a subsequent phase III trial based on prior information on the pCR effect is not straightforward. Aiming at designing such phase III trials with overall survival as primary endpoint using pCR information from previous trials, we consider a mixture model that incorporates both the survival and the binary endpoints. We propose to base the comparison between arms on the difference of the restricted mean survival times, and show how the effect size and sample size for overall survival rely on the probability of the binary response and the survival distribution by response status, both for each treatment arm. Moreover, we provide the sample size calculation under different scenarios and accompany them with an R package where all the computations have been implemented. We evaluate our proposal with a simulation study, and illustrate its application through a neoadjuvant breast cancer trial.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2020

A class of two-sample nonparametric statistics for binary and time-to-event outcomes

We propose a class of two-sample statistics for testing the equality of proportions and the equality of survival functions. We build our proposal on a weighted combination of a score test for the difference in proportions and a Weighted Kaplan-Meier statistic-based test for the difference of survival functions. The proposed statistics are fully non-parametric and do not rely on the proportional hazards assumption for the survival outcome. We present the asymptotic distribution of these statistics, propose a variance estimator and show their asymptotic properties under fixed and local alternatives. We discuss different choices of weights including those that control the relative relevance of each outcome and emphasize the type of difference to be detected in the survival outcome. We evaluate the performance of these statistics with a simulation study, and illustrate their use with a randomized phase III cancer vaccine trial. We have implemented the proposed statistics in the R package SurvBin, available on GitHub (https://github.com/MartaBofillRoig/SurvBin).

stat.ME↗

arXiv2020

Decision tool and Sample Size Calculator for Composite Endpoints

Summary points: - This article considers the combination of two binary or two time-to-event endpoints to form the primary composite endpoint for leading a trial. - It discusses the relative efficiency of choosing a composite endpoint over one of its components in terms of: the frequencies of observing each component; the relative treatment effect of the tested therapy; and the association between both components. - We highlight the very important role of the association between components in choosing the most efficient endpoint to use as primary. - For better grounded future trials, we recommend trialists to always reporting the association between components of the composite endpoint. - Common fallacies to note when using composite endpoints: i) composite endpoints always imply higher power; ii) treatment effect on the composite endpoint is similar to the average effects of its components; and iii) the probability of observing the primary endpoint increases significantly.

stat.AP↗