I-3 FULLY ADAPTIVE DESIGNS FOR CLINICAL TRIALS: SIMULTANEOUS LEARNING FROM MULTIPLE PATIENTS

Friday, October 19, 2012: 1:30 PM
Regency Ballroom D (Hyatt Regency)
Quantitative Methods and Theoretical Developments (MET)
Candidate for the Lee B. Lusted Student Prize Competition

Vishal Ahuja, B.E., M.A.Sc and John Birge, A.B., M.S., Ph.D., University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
  

Purpose : Traditional clinical trials are randomized, i.e., allocation of patients to treatments is purely random (e.g. fair coin-toss) and the goal is to maximize learning about treatment efficacy. Adaptive trial designs, on the other hand, allow clinicians to learn about drug effectiveness during the course of the trial.  An ideal adaptive design is one where patients are treated as effectively as possible without sacrificing any learning. We propose such an adaptive design, one that uses forward-looking algorithms to fully exploit learning from multiple patients simultaneously.    

Methods : The class of problems involving adaptive designs has its roots in the multi-armed bandit problem that exemplifies the tradeoff between the cost of gathering information and the benefit of exploiting information already gathered. The setup is in the form of a Markov Decision Process (MDP) with one major difference: in our setup, the transition probabilities are unknown. Instead, we assume a parametric distribution on the transition probabilities prior to the trial, where the parameters of the assumed distribution represent our beliefs on the outcome probabilities for each treatment. As the trial progresses, we update the beliefs dynamically in a Bayesian fashion using information observed during the trial (see transition diagram below).  We assume that patients are homogenous and patient responses are available immediately.   

Results : The Jointly Optimal design that we propose yields better patient outcomes compared to existing implementable adaptive designs. This is because our design incorporates previous responses of all patients when making decisions and naturally allows for mixtures of treatments without imposing constraints artificially. Under the scenarios we consider, our design provides an improvement, measured as an increase in expected proportion of successes, of up to 8.64% compared to the best existing adaptive design. Subsequently, we validate our design in a real setting by implementing it ex-post on a recently conducted stent study, a two-armed, randomized trial. We find that implementing our adaptive design would cause the total number of patient failures to decrease by 15 or over 32%, in expectation, where a failure is defined as 30-day rate of stroke or death.   

Conclusions : Adaptive designs that learn from multiple patients, such as our proposed design, result in improved patient outcomes compared to randomized designs or existing adaptive designs. We quantify this improvement under various scenarios.