Now what? w & w* examples [Two-Stage / GS Designs]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2018-05-09 13:53 (941 d 09:37 ago) – Posting: # 18757
Views: 9,471

(edited by d_labes on 2018-05-09 14:25)

Dear Helmut,

I have tried to demystify some aspects of choosing w and w* for the maximum combination test by looking into some examples:

Take nfix as sample size in stage 1 (Helmut’s proposal)
Guess:
CV=0.2, theta0=0.95 -> nfix = 20
Choose n1 = nfix = 20, i.e. w= 0.99, since w has to be <1.

Guess was too pessimistic:
e.g. true CV=0.15 -> nfix = 12
or theta0=0.975 -> nfix = 16
For both the sample size for stage 1 exceed the necessary total sample size of a fixed design. Thus a more realistic w* can’t be defined or should be set to the same value as w.
This results in the standard combination test.

Guess was too optimistic:
e.g. true CV=0.25 -> nfix = 28
or theta0=0.925 -> nfix = 26
Both lead to a ‘more realistic’ w*= 0.71 or 0.77. Let's choose w* = 0.7 for simplicity.


Power & sample size of the scenarios
                                                               N
                                                       ------------------
                   CV   theta0  w      w*     power    ASN   Median  p95%
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guess             0.20  0.95   0.99   0.5*)   0.866    21.5    20     34
                               0.99   0.99    0.872    24.9    20     30
                               0.99   0.7     0.870    21.5    20     28
Too pessimistic   0.15  0.95   0.99   0.99    0.966    20.1    20     20
                  0.20  0.975  0.99   0.99    0.936    22.9    20     24
Too optimistic    0.25  0.95   0.99   0.7     0.842    29.1    20     64
                  0.20  0.925  0.99   0.7     0.760    22.6    20     36
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) w* = w/2 according to Maurer et al.
No futility criterion



Take nfix/2 as sample size in stage 1 (Maurer et al.)
Guess:
CV=0.2, theta0=0.95 -> nfix = 20
Choose n1 = nfix/2 = 10, i.e. w= 0.5.

Guess was too pessimistic:
e.g. true CV=0.15 -> nfix = 12
or theta0=0.975 -> nfix = 16
This would let to a ‘more realistic’ w*= 0.83 or 0.625, respectively. Let's take for simplicity w* = 0.7.

Guess was too optimistic:
e.g. true CV=0.25 -> nfix = 28
or theta0=0.925 -> nfix = 26
Both lead to a ‘more realistic’ w*= 0.36 or 0.38. Let's take for simplicity w* = 0.4.


Power & sample size of the scenarios
                                                               N
                                                       ------------------
                   CV   theta0  w      w*     power    ASN   Median  p95%
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guess             0.20  0.95   0.5    0.25*)  0.838    22.7    20     46
                               0.5    0.7     0.844    22.6    18     50
                               0.5    0.4     0.841    22.5    20     48
Too pessimistic   0.15  0.95   0.5    0.7     0.881    13.0    10     24
                  0.20  0.975  0.5    0.7     0.896    21.4    18     48
Too optimistic    0.25  0.95   0.5    0.4     0.822    37.1    34     78
                  0.20  0.925  0.99   0.4     0.747    24.1    20     52
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*) w* = w/2 according to Maurer et al.
No futility criterion


Confusion :-D:

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,243 posts in 4,431 threads, 1,483 registered users;
online 6 (0 registered, 6 guests [including 2 identified bots]).
Forum time: Saturday 22:31 CET (Europe/Vienna)

I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science,
with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle
and find our way by trial and error,
building our road behind us as we proceed.    Max Born

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