An Integrative Review of Multistage Clinical Trials
Archives of Advances in Biosciences,
Vol. 14 No. 1 (2023),
19 February 2023
,
Page 1-7
https://doi.org/10.22037/aab.v14i1.39531
Abstract
Introduction: Clinical trials have long been vital to advancing how to prevent, diagnose, and treat diseases. However, traditional clinical trials are limited to one-stage interventions and therefore have little flexibility. With application of precise medicine, new concepts in terms of design can increase the flexibility of clinical trials, which in turn augment the likelihood that a trial will benefit the most people who participate.
Materials and Methods: In today's world, we are facing the spread of various diseases. Thus, physicians have to make numerous treatment decisions in different stages of the disease. In practice, such decisions represent the way physicians treat patients, but this is statistically a dynamic treatment regimen (DTR). Effective DTRs can be developed and studied in clinical trials called Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials (SMART).
Results: A total of 30 studies were extracted from reliable databases and websites, and research related to SMART was reviewed.
Conclusion: Considering that most experiments are performed in one step, and intermediate events are ignored and that focus is on the final event, introducing SMART plans and the concept of DTRs is important for researchers and clinical colleagues; treatment guidelines must encompass entire treatment regimens in order for them to be useful for clinicians and patients.
- Dynamic treatment regimen
- SMART
- Two step design
How to Cite
References
Atkins RC. The epidemiology of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int Suppl. 2005; 67:14-8. [DOI:10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.09403.x] [PMID]
Kidwell KM. SMART designs in cancer research: past, present and future. Clin Trials. 2014; 11(4):445-56. [DOI:10.1177/1740774514525691] [PMID] [PMCID]
Murphy SA. An experimental design for the development of adaptive treatment strategies. Stat Med. 2005; 24(10):1455–81. [DOI:10.1002/sim.2022] [PMID]
Hager R, Tsiatis AA, Davidian M. Optimal two-stage dynamic treatment regimes from a classification perspective with censored survival data. Biometrics. 2018; 74(4):1180–92. [DOI:10.1111/biom.12894] [PMID] [PMCID]
Chao YC, Tran Q, Tsodikov A, Kidwell KM. Joint modeling and multiple comparisons with the best of data from a SMART with survival outcomes. Biostatistics. 2022; 23(1):294-313. [DOI:10.1093/biostatistics/kxaa025] [PMID] [PMCID]
Kim JS, Asher CA, Burkhauser M, Mesite L, Leyva D. Using a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) to develop an adaptive K–2 literacy intervention with personalized print texts and app-based digital activities. AERA Open. 2019; 5(3):1-18. [DOI:10.1177/2332858419872701]
Fu SS, Rothman AJ, Vock DM, Lindgren B, Almirall D, Begnaud A, et al. Program for lung cancer screening and tobacco cessation: Study protocol of a sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trial. Contemp Clin Trials.
; 60:86–95. [DOI:10.1016/j.cct.2017.07.002] [PMID] [PMCID]
Kelleher SA, Dorfman CS, Vilardaga JC, Majestic C, Winger J, Gandhi V, et al. Optimizing delivery of a behavioral pain intervention in cancer patients using a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial SMART. Contemp Clin Trials. 2017; 57:51–7. [DOI:10.1016/j.cct.2017.04.001] [PMID] [PMCID]
Fernandez ME, Schlechter CR, Del Fiol G, Gibson B, Kawamoto K, Siaperas T, et al. QuitSMART Utah: an implementation study protocol for a cluster-randomized, multi-level sequential multiple assignment randomized trial to increase reach and impact of tobacco cessation treatment in community health centers. Implement Sci. 2020; 15(1):1-13. [DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-0967-2] [PMID] [PMCID]
Almirall D, Kasari C, McCaffrey DF, Nahum-Shani I. Developing optimized adaptive interventions in education. J Res Educ Eff. 2018; 11(1):27-34. [DOI:10.1080/19345747.2017.1407136] [PMID] [PMCID]
Brown Jr BW. The crossover experiment for clinical trials. Biometrics. 1980; 36(1):69-79. [PMID]
Fisher RA. The arrangement of field experiments. J Minist Agricul. 1980; 36(1):69-79. [DOI:10.23637/rothamsted.
v61q]
Giachetti RE, Marcelli V, Cifuentes J, Rojas JA. An agent‐based simulation model of human‐robot team performance in military environments. Syst Eng. 2013; 16(1):15-28. [DOI:10.1002/sys.21216]
Stone RM, Berg DT, George SL, Dodge RK, Paciucci PA, Schulman PP, et al. Postremission therapy in older patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia: a randomized trial comparing mitoxantrone and intermediate-dose cytarabine with standard-dose cytarabine. Blood. 2001; 98(3):548-53. [DOI: 10.1182/blood.v98.3.548] [PMID]
Holland CW, Cravens DW. Fractional factorial experimental designs in marketing research. J Mark Res. 1973; 10(3):270-6. [DOI:10.1177/00222437730100030]
Cheung YK, Chakraborty B, Davidson KW. Sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) with adaptive randomization for quality improvement in depression treatment program. Biometrics. 2015; 71(2):450-9. [DOI: 10.1111/biom.12258] [PMID] [PMCID]
Robins J. A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period—application to control of the healthy worker survivor effect.
Math Model. 1986; 7(9-12):1393-512. [DOI:10.1016/0270-0255(86)90088-6]
Robins JM. Causal inference from complex longitudinal data. Latent variable modeling and applications to causality. Springer; 1997.[DOI:10.1007/978-1-4612-1842-5_4]
Murphy SA, van der Laan MJ, Robins JM, Group CPPR. Marginal mean models for dynamic regimes. J Am Stat Assoc. 2001; 96(456):1410-23. [DOI:10.1198/01621450175
[PMID] [PMCID]
Lunceford JK, Davidian M, Tsiatis AA. Estimation of survival distributions of treatment policies in two‐stage randomization designs in clinical trials. Biometrics.
; 58(1):48-57. [DOI:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2002.00048.x] [PMID]
Lavori PW, Dawson R. Dynamic treatment regimes: practical design considerations. Clin Trials. 2004; 1(1):9-20. [DOI:10.1191/1740774s04cn002oa] [PMID]
Guo X, Tsiatis A. A weighted risk set estimator for survival distributions in two-stage randomization designs with censored survival data. Int J Biostat. 2005; 1(1). [DOI:10.2202/1557-4679.1000]
Thall PF, Wooten LH, Logothetis CJ, Millikan RE, Tannir NM. Bayesian and frequentist two‐stage treatment strategies based on sequential failure times subject to interval censoring. Stat Med. 2007; 26(26):4687-702. [DOI:10.1002/sim.2894] [PMID]
Shortreed SM, Moodie EE. Estimating the optimal dynamic antipsychotic treatment regime: evidence from the sequential multiple‐assignment randomized clinical antipsychotic trials of intervention and effectiveness schizophrenia study. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat.
; 61(4):577-99. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9876.2012.01041.x] [PMID] [PMCID]
Zhao Y-Q, Zeng D, Laber EB, Song R, Yuan M, Kosorok MR. Doubly robust learning for estimating individualized treatment with censored data. Biometrika. 2015; 102(1):151-68. [DOI:10.1093/biomet/asu050] [PMID] [PMCID]
Chu YC, Kuo WT, Cheng YR, Lee CY, Shiau CY, Tarng DC, et al. A survival metadata analysis responsive tool (SMART) for web-based analysis of patient survival and risk. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):1-9. [DOI:10.1038/s41598-018-31290-z] [PMID] [PMCID]
Tamura RN, Krischer JP, Pagnoux C, Micheletti R, Grayson PC, Chen Y-F, et al. A small n sequential multiple assignment randomized trial design for use in rare disease research. Contemp Clin Trials. 2016; 46:48-51. [DOI:10.1016/j.cct.2015.11.010] [PMID] [PMCID]
Hager R, Tsiatis AA, Davidian M. Optimal two‐stage dynamic treatment regimes from a classification perspective with censored survival data. Biometrics. 2018; 74(4):1180-92. [DOI:10.1111/biom.12894] [PMID] [PMCID]
Novitzke JM. The significance of clinical trials. J Vasc Interv Neurol. 2008; 1(1):31. [PMID] [PMCID]
Weiss ST, Samet JM. An assessment of physician knowledge of epidemiology and biostatistics. J Med Educ. 1980; 55(8):692–7. [DOI:10.1097/00001888-198008000-00007] [PMID]
- Abstract Viewed: 228 times
- PDF Downloaded: 205 times