Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Stroke. 2016 Nov 15;47(12):2931–2937. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.015436

Table 3.

Percentages of adaptive trial simulations that terminate for efficacy / futility by analysis stage

Simulations (%) that end for efficacy by subgroup Total % of
simulations
that end for
efficacy
Total % of
simulations
that end for
futility
Total % of
simulations
that end
Analysis stage at
study completion
C1 C1–2 C1–3 C1–4 C1–5 C1–6
Cat #1 1st interim (n=450) 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 3.9% 7.4% 8.4% 15.8%
2nd interim (n=675) 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.5% 5.6% 10.8% 12.1% 22.9%
Final (n=900) 11.8% 0.1% 0.1% 0.6% 1.2% 15.1% 28.9% 32.5%** 61.4%
Total 19.2% 0.1% 0.2% 1.0% 2.0% 24.6% 47.0%* 53.0% 100.0%
Cat #2 1st interim (n=450) 0.1% 7.5% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 5.2% 12.9% 2.7% 15.6%
2nd interim (n=675) 0.1% 14.5% 0.2% 0.0% 0.2% 10.0% 24.9% 5.3% 30.2%
Final (n=900) 0.2% 25.9% 0.3% 0.0% 0.4% 17.9% 44.7% 9.5%** 54.2%
Total 0.4% 47.8% 0.6% 0.0% 0.7% 33.0% 82.5%* 17.5% 100.0%

Cat #1 indicates categorization scheme #1 in which patients are categorized based on time and location of the arterial occlusion. Cat #2 indicates categorization scheme #2 in which patients are categorized only based on time. C1-y indicates a subgroup that consists of consecutive patient categories. See figure 1 for the exact criteria that define each patient category in scheme #1 and #2. C1–6 includes all 6 patient categories and thus indicates that the trial completes without subgroup selection

*

The overall total corresponds to the power of the adaptive trial design

**

The percentage at the final analysis (n=900) reflects the number of simulations that neither stopped for efficacy or futility at an interim analysis nor demonstrated efficacy at the final analysis.