Estimating the sample size for a pilot randomised trial to minimise the overall trial sample size for the external pilot and main trial for a continuous outcome variable

Amy L Whitehead, Steven A Julious, Cindy L Cooper, Michael J Campbell, Amy L Whitehead, Steven A Julious, Cindy L Cooper, Michael J Campbell

Abstract

Sample size justification is an important consideration when planning a clinical trial, not only for the main trial but also for any preliminary pilot trial. When the outcome is a continuous variable, the sample size calculation requires an accurate estimate of the standard deviation of the outcome measure. A pilot trial can be used to get an estimate of the standard deviation, which could then be used to anticipate what may be observed in the main trial. However, an important consideration is that pilot trials often estimate the standard deviation parameter imprecisely. This paper looks at how we can choose an external pilot trial sample size in order to minimise the sample size of the overall clinical trial programme, that is, the pilot and the main trial together. We produce a method of calculating the optimal solution to the required pilot trial sample size when the standardised effect size for the main trial is known. However, as it may not be possible to know the standardised effect size to be used prior to the pilot trial, approximate rules are also presented. For a main trial designed with 90% power and two-sided 5% significance, we recommend pilot trial sample sizes per treatment arm of 75, 25, 15 and 10 for standardised effect sizes that are extra small (≤0.1), small (0.2), medium (0.5) or large (0.8), respectively.

Keywords: Pilot trial; RCT; continuous outcome; power; sample size.

© The Author(s) 2015.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Process for calculating the optimal pilot trial sample size.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Comparing overall total trial sample sizes for each adjustment method over varying pilot trial sample size for a standardised difference of 0.2. *Lines from bottom to top: Line 1, Standard sample size calculation with no adjustment method applied (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 24, 30 and 70); Line 2, Main trial sample size calculation based on the NCT approach (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 24 and 30); Line 3, Main trial sample size calculation based on the 80% UCL approach (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 20, 24, 30 and 40) and Line 4, Main trial sample size calculation based on the 95% UCL approach (point represents pilot trial sample size of 55).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Comparing overall trial sample sizes for each adjustment method for varying pilot trial sample sizes for a standardised difference of 0.5. *Lines from bottom to top: Line 1, Standard sample size calculation with no adjustment method applied (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 24, 30 and 70); Line 2, Main trial sample size calculation based on the NCT approach (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 24 and 30); Line 3, Main trial sample size calculation based on the 80% UCL approach (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 20, 24, 30 and 40) and Line 4, Main trial sample size calculation based on the 95% UCL approach (point represents pilot trial sample size of 55).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Comparing overall trial sample sizes for each adjustment method for varying pilot trial sample sizes for a standardised difference of 0.8. *Lines from bottom to top: Line 1, Standard sample size calculation with no adjustment method applied (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 24, 30 and 70); Line 2, Main trial sample size calculation based on the NCT approach (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 24 and 30); Line 3, Main trial sample size calculation based on the 80% UCL approach (points represent pilot trial sample sizes of 20, 24, 30 and 40) and Line 4, Main trial sample size calculation based on the 95% UCL approach (point represents pilot trial sample size of 55).

References

    1. Campbell MJ, Machin D, Walters SJ. Medical statistics: a textbook for the health sciences, Chicester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 2010.
    1. Halpern SD, Karlawish JHT, Berlin JA. The continuing unethical conduct of underpowered clinical trials. JAMA 2002; 288(3): 358–362.
    1. Machin D, Campbell MJ, Tan SB, et al. Sample size tables for clinical studies, 3rd ed Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008.
    1. Julious SA. Sample sizes for clinical trials, Florida, USA: Chapman and Hall, 2009.
    1. Whitehead AL, Sully BGO, Campbell MJ. Pilot and feasibility studies: is there a difference from each other and from a randomised controlled trial? Contemp Clin Trials 2014; 38: 130–133.
    1. Pocock SJ. Clinical trials: a practical approach, Chicester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1983.
    1. Friede T, Kieser M. A comparison of methods for adaptive sample size adjustment. Stat Med 2001; 20: 3861–3873.
    1. Denne JS, Jennison C. Estimating the sample size for a T-test using an internal pilot. Stat Med 1999; 18: 1575–1585.
    1. Julious SA, Owen RJ. Sample size calculations for clinical studies allowing for uncertainty about the variance. Pharmaceut Stat 2006; 5: 29–37.
    1. Browne RH. On the use of a pilot sample for sample size determination. Stat Med 1995; 14: 1933–1940.
    1. Sim J, Lewis M. The size of a pilot study for a clinical trial should be calculated in relation to considerations of precision and efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol 2012; 65: 301–308.
    1. Kieser M, Wassmer G. On the use of the upper confidence limit for the variance from a pilot sample for sample size determination. Biom J 1996; 8: 941–949.
    1. Lancaster GA, Dodd S, Williamson PR. Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. J Eval Clin Pract 2004; 10: 307–312.
    1. Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, et al. A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010; 10: 1–1.
    1. Arain M, Campbell MJ, Cooper CL, et al. What is a pilot or feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010; 10: 67–67.
    1. Julious SA. Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharmaceut Stat 2005; 4: 287–291.
    1. Teare MD, Dimairo M, Shephard N, et al. Sample size requirements to estimate key design parameters from external pilot randomised controlled trials: a simulation study. Trials 2014; 15: 264–264.
    1. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992; 112: 155–159.
    1. Birkett MA, Day SJ. Internal pilot studies for estimating sample size. Stat Med 1994; 13: 2455–2463.
    1. NETSCC. Glossary: feasibility and pilot studies, (accessed 8 October 2012).
    1. Day S. Clinical trial numbers and confidence intervals of pre-specified size. Lancet 1988; 332: 1427–1427.
    1. Julious SA, Patterson SD. Sample sizes for estimation in clinical research. Pharmaceut Stat 2004; 3: 213–215.
    1. Grieve AP. Sample sizes and confidence intervals. Am Stat 1990; 44: 190–190.
    1. Wood J, Lambert M. Sample size calculations for trials in health services research. J Health Serv Res Policy 1999; 4: 226–229.
    1. Lee EC, Whitehead AL, Jacques RM, et al. The statistical interpretation of pilot trials: should significance thresholds be reconsidered? BMC Med Res Methodol 2014; 14: 41–41.
    1. Julious SA, Swank DJ. Moving statistics beyond the individual clinical trial: applying decision science to optimize a clinical development plan. Pharmaceut Stat 2005; 4: 37–46.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner