Planning and monitoring of placebo-controlled survival trials: comparison of the triangular test with usual interim analyses methods

Aims For ethical and economic reasons, interim analysis of phase III clinical trials is essential. This study was conducted to compare the efficiency of two interim analysis procedures, which could be used to allow early termination of a clinical trial. Methods We made a post hoc application of two interim analysis methods (Lan & DeMets with O'Brien-Flemming modification, and the triangular test according to Whitehead) by using individual patient data from four published placebo-controlled survival trials. We determined the date the trial would have been stopped had each method been used, and we estimated consequent results in terms of events and patient numbers included in the trial, the duration of the trial, and on treatment effect. Results The triangular test provided the lowest number of events required to reach a conclusion of the trials while providing an accurate estimate of experimental treatment effects. The triangular test thus indicated the smallest number of patients that would have been enrolled, and the shortest trial duration. The difference between the methods was most important with a detrimental effect of experimental treatment: the number of required events was reduced by 75% and the trial duration was shortened by 48% with the triangular test compared to the Lan & DeMets method. Conclusions Stopping a trial early must depend on the clinical context. It is most important to stop a placebo-controlled trial as soon as possible when the experimental treatment can be shown deleterious. In such a situation the triangular test is more appropriate than the Lan & DeMets method. When a treatment effect is no different from, or better than, placebo the triangular test is also superior but the importance of premature termination of the trial in such cases has to be balanced against the inevitable reduction of information that the trial can provide