“Interim power” [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2013-10-08 16:58 (4276 d 00:35 ago) – Posting: # 11627
Views: 19,836

Hi Karthik,

❝ After completion of stage 1 we want to evaluate the power. If power is >= 80 evaluate BE at stage 1 (alpha=0.05) and if power < 80% evaluate BE at stage 1 (alpha=0.0294)


Yes, that’s “Method C”.

❝ After evaluation of power only we can plan further step.


Correct.

❝ In most of your lecture and discussion you mentioned No a posteriori Power.


That’s not a posteriori power, but part of the decision tree of the interim analysis. A posteriori would be after the study is completed (passing in stage 1 or in the combined analysis). See also what Potvin et al. state concerning their Example 2:

Using the data from both stages, we find that the two-sided CI for the ratio (T/R) of geometric means at an α level of 0.0294 and DF = 17 is 88.45–116.38%, which meets the 80–125% acceptance criterion. We stop here and conclude BE, irrespective of the fact that we have not yet achieved the desired power of 80% (power = 66.3%).

(my emphasis)

❝ So In two stage study design how to evaluate the Power for our data.


After stage 1

❝ Any validated method is there to evaluate the power for two stage study design or can I use PowerTOST or Winnonlin to evaluate the power.


PowerTOST is fine (see this example for Method B). Power in Phoenix/WinNonlin is wrong – don’t use it!

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,672 registered users;
34 visitors (0 registered, 34 guests [including 18 identified bots]).
Forum time: 17:34 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Reach for the stars,
even if you have to stand on a cactus.    Susan Longacre

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5