Statistical Science

Selecting a Biased-Coin Design

Anthony C. Atkinson

Full-text: Open access

Abstract

Biased-coin designs are used in clinical trials to allocate treatments with some randomness while maintaining approximately equal allocation. More recent rules are compared with Efron’s [Biometrika 58 (1971) 403–417] biased-coin rule and extended to allow balance over covariates. The main properties are loss of information, due to imbalance, and selection bias. Theoretical results, mostly large sample, are assembled and assessed by small-sample simulations. The properties of the rules fall into three clear categories. A Bayesian rule is shown to have appealing properties; at the cost of slight imbalance, bias is virtually eliminated for large samples.

Article information

Source
Statist. Sci., Volume 29, Number 1 (2014), 144-163.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 9 May 2014

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1399645742

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1214/13-STS449

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR3201860

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1332.62264

Keywords
Clinical trial covariate balancing loss of information optimum experimental design random allocation selection bias

Citation

Atkinson, Anthony C. Selecting a Biased-Coin Design. Statist. Sci. 29 (2014), no. 1, 144--163. doi:10.1214/13-STS449. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ss/1399645742


Export citation

References

  • Atkinson, A. C. (1982). Optimum biased coin designs for sequential clinical trials with prognostic factors. Biometrika 69 61–67.
  • Atkinson, A. C. (2002). The comparison of designs for sequential clinical trials with covariate information. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. A 165 349–373.
  • Atkinson, A. C. (2003). The distribution of loss in two-treatment biased-coin designs. Biostatistics 4 179–193.
  • Atkinson, A. C. (2004). Adaptive biased-coin designs for clinical trials with several treatments. Discuss. Math. Probab. Stat. 24 85–108.
  • Atkinson, A. C. (2012). Bias and loss: The two sides of a biased coin. Stat. Med. 31 3494–3503.
  • Atkinson, A. C. and Biswas, A. (2005a). Bayesian adaptive biased-coin designs for clinical trials with normal responses. Biometrics 61 118–125.
  • Atkinson, A. C. and Biswas, A. (2005b). Adaptive biased-coin designs for skewing the allocation proportion in clinical trials with normal responses. Stat. Med. 24 2477–2492.
  • Atkinson, A. C. and Biswas, A. (2014). Randomised Response-Adaptive Designs in Clinical Trials. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton.
  • Atkinson, A. C., Donev, A. N. and Tobias, R. D. (2007). Optimum Experimental Designs, with SAS. Oxford Statistical Science Series 34. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
  • Bailey, R. A. and Nelson, P. R. (2003). Hadamard randomization: A valid restriction of random permuted blocks. Biom. J. 45 554–560.
  • Baldi Antognini, A. (2008). A theoretical analysis of the power of biased coin designs. J. Statist. Plann. Inference 138 1792–1798.
  • Baldi Antognini, A. and Giovagnoli, A. (2004). A new “biased coin design” for the sequential allocation of two treatments. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. C Appl. Stat. 53 651–664.
  • Baldi Antognini, A. and Zagoraiou, M. (2011). The covariate-adaptive biased coin design for balancing clinical trials in the presence of prognostic factors. Biometrika 98 519–535.
  • Ball, F. G., Smith, A. F. M. and Verdinelli, I. (1993). Biased coin designs with a Bayesian bias. J. Statist. Plann. Inference 34 403–421.
  • Begg, C. B. and Kalish, L. A. (1984). Treatment allocation for nonlinear models in clinical trials: The logistic model. Biometrics 40 409–420.
  • Berger, V. W. (2005). Selection Bias and Covariate Imbalances in Clinical Trials. Wiley, New York.
  • Biswas, A. and Bhattacharya, R. (2011). Treatment adaptive allocations in randomized clinical trials: An overview. In Handbook of Adaptive Designs in Pharmaceutical and Clinical Development (A. Pong and S.-C. Chow, eds.) 17:1–17:19. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
  • Blackwell, D. and Hodges, J. L. Jr. (1957). Design for the control of selection bias. Ann. Math. Statist. 28 449–460.
  • Burman, C. F. (1996). On Sequential Treatment Allocations in Clinical Trials. Dept. Mathematics, Göteborg.
  • Chen, Y.-P. (1999). Biased coin design with imbalance tolerance. Comm. Statist. Stochastic Models 15 953–975.
  • Cox, D. R. (1951). Some systematic experimental designs. Biometrika 38 312–323.
  • Efron, B. (1971). Forcing a sequential experiment to be balanced. Biometrika 58 403–417.
  • Efron, B. (1980). Randomizing and balancing a complicated sequential experiment. In Biostatistics Casebook (R. J. Miller, B. Efron, B. W. Brown and L. E. Moses, eds.) 19–30. Wiley, New York.
  • Gwise, T. E., Hu, J. and Hu, F. (2008). Optimal biased coins for two-arm clinical trials. Stat. Interface 1 125–135.
  • Gwise, T. E., Zhou, J. and Hu, F. (2011). An optimal response adaptive biased coin design with $k$ heteroscedastic treatments. J. Statist. Plann. Inference 141 235–242.
  • Heritier, S., Gebski, V. and Pillai, A. (2005). Dynamic balancing randomization in controlled clinical trials. Stat. Med. 24 3729–3741.
  • Hu, Y. and Hu, F. (2012). Asymptotic properties of covariate-adaptive randomization. Ann. Statist. 40 1794–1815.
  • Hu, F. and Rosenberger, W. F. (2006). The Theory of Response-Adaptive Randomization in Clinical Trials. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
  • Lagakos, S. W. and Pocock, S. J. (1984). Randomization and stratification in cancer clinical trials: An international survey. In Cancer Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice (M. E. Buyse, M. J. Staquet and R. J. Sylvester, eds.). Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
  • Lin, Y. and Su, Z. (2012). Balancing continuous and categorical baseline covariates in sequential clinical trials using the area between empirical cumulative distribution functions. Stat. Med. 31 1961–1971.
  • Markaryan, T. and Rosenberger, W. F. (2010). Exact properties of Efron’s biased coin randomization procedure. Ann. Statist. 38 1546–1567.
  • McEntegart, D. (2003). The pursuit of balance using stratified and dynamic randomization techniques: An overview. Drug Information Journal 37 293–308.
  • Pocock, S. J. (1983). Clinical Trials. Wiley, New York.
  • Pocock, S. J. and Simon, R. (1975). Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 31 103–115.
  • Proschan, M., Brittain, E. and Kammerman, L. (2012). Letter to the editor. Biometrics 68 990–991.
  • Rosenberger, W. F. and Lachin, J. M. (2002). Randomization in Clinical Trials: Theory and Practice. Wiley, New York.
  • Rosenberger, W. F. and Sverdlov, O. (2008). Handling covariates in the design of clinical trials. Statist. Sci. 23 404–419.
  • Rosenberger, W. F., Sverdlov, O. and Hu, F. (2012). Adaptive randomization for clinical trials. J. Biopharm. Statist. 22 719–736.
  • Senn, S., Anisimov, V. V. and Fedorov, V. V. (2010). Comparisons of minimization and Atkinson’s algorithm. Stat. Med. 29 721–730.
  • Shao, J., Yu, X. and Zhong, B. (2010). A theory for testing hypotheses under covariate-adaptive randomization. Biometrika 97 347–360.
  • Smith, R. L. (1984a). Properties of biased coin designs in sequential clinical trials. Ann. Statist. 12 1018–1034.
  • Smith, R. L. (1984b). Sequential treatment allocation using biased coin designs. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol. 46 519–543.
  • Soares, J. F. and Wu, C. F. J. (1983). Some restricted randomization rules in sequential designs. Comm. Statist. Theory Methods 12 2017–2034.
  • Sverdlov, O. and Rosenberger, W. F. (2013). Randomization in clinical trials: Can we eliminate bias? Clinical Trial Perspective 3 37–47.
  • Wei, L. J. (1978). The adaptive biased coin design for sequential experiments. Ann. Statist. 6 92–100.
  • Zhang, L.-X., Hu, F., Cheung, S. H. and Chan, W. S. (2007). Asymptotic properties of covariate-adjusted response-adaptive designs. Ann. Statist. 35 1166–1182.
  • Zhao, W., Weng, Y., Wu, Q. and Palesch, Y. (2012). Quantitative comparison of randomization designs in sequential clinical trials based on treatment balance and allocation randomness. Pharm. Stat. 11 39–48.