Skip to main content
. 2017 Jul 7;8(51):88376–88385. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.19088

Table 2. Operating characteristics.

Scenario 1: Arm B vs. A: 40% versus 20% Arm B
Probability fail in stage 1 fail in stage 2 pass stage 2
Arm A fail in stage 1 0.03 0.03 0.5
fail in stage 2 0.02 0.02 0.32
pass stage 2 0 0 0.09
Both arms passing the 2nd stage: 9%. Among them, Arm B claims 4.09% as winner.
Overall power of Arm B= 86%.
Scenario 2: Arm B vs. A: 35% versus 20% Arm B
Probability fail in stage 1 fail in stage 2 pass stage 2
Arm A fail in stage 1 0.06 0.07 0.42
fail in stage 2 0.04 0.05 0.27
pass stage 2 0.01 0.01 0.07
Both arms passing the 2nd stage: 7%. Among them, Arm B claims 2.12% as winner.
Overall power of Arm B= 71%.
Scenario 3: Arm B vs. A: 40% versus 25% Arm B
Probability fail in stage 1 fail in stage 2 pass stage 2
Arm A fail in stage 1 0.02 0.02 0.32
fail in stage 2 0.02 0.02 0.33
pass stage 2 0.01 0.01 0.26
Both arms passing the 2nd stage: 26%. Among them, Arm B claims 10.79% as winner.
Overall power of Arm B= 75%.
Scenario 4: Arm B vs. A: 20% versus 20% Arm B
Probability fail in stage 1 fail in stage 2 pass stage 2
Arm A fail in stage 1 0.3 0.2 0.05
fail in stage 2 0.19 0.13 0.03
pass stage 2 0.05 0.03 0.01
Both arms passing the 2nd stage: 1%. Among them, Arm B claims 0.01% as winner.
Type I error= 8.73%.