Properties of the weighted log-rank test under delayed effects assumption in the design of confirmatory studies with delayed effects
share
Proportional hazards are a common assumption when designing confirmatory clinical trials in oncology. This assumption not only affects the analysis part but also the sample size calculation. The presence of delayed effects causes a change in the hazard ratio while the trial is ongoing since at the beginning we do not observe any difference between treatment arms and after some unknown time point, the differences between treatment arms will start to appear. Hence, the proportional hazards assumption no longer holds and both sample size calculation and analysis methods to be used should be reconsidered. The weighted log-rank test allows a weighting for early, middle and late differences through the Fleming and Harrington class of weights, and is proven to be more efficient when the proportional hazards assumption does not hold. The Fleming and Harrington class of weights, along with the estimated delay, can be incorporated into the sample size calculation in order to maintain the desired power once the treatment arm differences start to appear. In this article, we explore the impact of delayed effects in group sequential and adaptive group sequential designs, and make an empirical evaluation in terms of power and type-I error rate of the of the weighted log-rank in a simulated scenario. We also give some practical recommendations regarding which methodology should be used in the presence of delayed effects depending on certain characteristics of the trial.
READ FULL TEXT
