This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lavori, P. W Articles by Dawson, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lavori, P. W Articles by Dawson, R. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Dynamic treatment regimes: practical design considerations

Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program, VA Palo Alto Health Care System (151K), 795 Willow Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USAPhilip.Lavori{at}med.va.gov

Ree Dawson

Frontier Science Research Foundation, Boston, MA, USA

Background Clinical management of chronic disease requires a dynamic treatment regime (DTR): rules for choosing the new treatment based on the history of response to past treatments. Estimating and comparing the effects of DTRs from a sample of observed trajectories of treatment and outcome depends on the untestable assumption that new treatments are assigned independently of potential future responses to treatment, conditional on the history of treatments and response to date ("sequential ignorability"). In longitudinal observational studies, sequential ignorability must be assumed, while randomization of dynamic regimes can guarantee it.

Methods Using several clinical examples, we describe the simplest randomized experimental designs for comparing DTRs. We begin by considering an initial treatment A and a second treatment B, and discuss how a dynamic treatment regime that starts with A and leads (sometimes) to B, might be compared to either fixed treatment A or B. We also illustrate the problem of finding the optimal sequence of treatments in a DTR, when there are several choices. We describe and contrast two ways of incorporating randomization into studies to compare such regimes: baseline randomization among DTRs versus randomization at the decision points (sequentially randomized designs).

Conclusions We discuss estimation and inference from both baseline randomized and sequentially randomized designs and conclude with a discussion of the differences between the experimental and observational approaches to optimizing and comparing dynamic treatment regimes.

Clinical Trials, Vol. 1, No. 1, 9-20 (2004)
DOI: 10.1191/1740774504cn002oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. F. Auyeung, Q. Long, E. B. Royster, S. Murthy, M. D McNutt, D. Lawson, A. Miller, A. Manatunga, and D. L Musselman Sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial design of neurobehavioral treatment for patients with metastatic malignant melanoma undergoing high-dose interferon-alpha therapy Clinical Trials, October 1, 2009; 6(5): 480 - 490. [Abstract] [PDF]

				O. Bembom and M. J. van der Laan Statistical Methods for Analyzing Sequentially Randomized Trials J Natl Cancer Inst, November 7, 2007; 99(21): 1577 - 1582. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Moodie Letter To The Editor Clinical Trials, October 1, 2004; 1(5): 471 - 471. [PDF]