<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Kaizer AM</submitter><funding>NIDA NIH HHS</funding><funding>Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University</funding><funding>NCI NIH HHS</funding><funding>National Institute on Drug Abuse</funding><pagination>785-798</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9907719</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>30(3)</volume><pubmed_abstract>Breakthroughs in cancer biology have defined new research programs emphasizing the development of therapies that target specific pathways in tumor cells. Innovations in clinical trial design have followed with master protocols defined by inclusive eligibility criteria and evaluations of multiple therapies and/or histologies. Consequently, characterization of subpopulation heterogeneity has become central to the formulation and selection of a study design. However, this transition to master protocols has led to challenges in identifying the optimal trial design and proper calibration of hyperparameters. We often evaluate a range of null and alternative scenarios; however, there has been little guidance on how to synthesize the potentially disparate recommendations for what may be optimal. T</pubmed_abstract><journal>Statistical methods in medical research</journal><pubmed_title>Statistical design considerations for trials that study multiple indications.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC9907719</pmcid><funding_grant_id>R01 DA046320</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>P30 CA043703</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>NIH R01-DA046320</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Chen N</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Koopmeiners JS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kaizer AM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hobbs BP</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Statistical design considerations for trials that study multiple indications.</name><description>Breakthroughs in cancer biology have defined new research programs emphasizing the development of therapies that target specific pathways in tumor cells. Innovations in clinical trial design have followed with master protocols defined by inclusive eligibility criteria and evaluations of multiple therapies and/or histologies. Consequently, characterization of subpopulation heterogeneity has become central to the formulation and selection of a study design. However, this transition to master protocols has led to challenges in identifying the optimal trial design and proper calibration of hyperparameters. We often evaluate a range of null and alternative scenarios; however, there has been little guidance on how to synthesize the potentially disparate recommendations for what may be optimal. T</description><dates><release>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2021 Mar</publication><modification>2026-03-15T14:00:16.364Z</modification><creation>2025-04-04T23:52:30.181Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC9907719</accession><cross_references><pubmed>33267746</pubmed><doi>10.1177/0962280220975187</doi></cross_references></HashMap>