Abstract
Inference following two-stage adaptive designs (also known as two-stage randomization designs) with survival endpoints usually focuses on estimating and comparing survival distributions for the different treatment strategies. The aim is to identify the treatment strategy(ies) that leads to better survival of the patients. The objectives of this study were to assess the performance three commonly cited methods for estimating survival distributions in two-stage randomization designs. We review three non-parametric methods for estimating survival distributions in two-stage adaptive designs and compare their performance using simulation studies. The simulation studies show that the method based on the marginal mean model is badly affected by high censoring rates and response rate. The other two methods which are natural extensions of the Nelson-Aalen estimator and the Kaplan-Meier estimator have similar performance. These two methods yield survival estimates which have less bias and more precise than the marginal mean model even in cases of small sample sizes. The weighted versions of the Nelson-Aalen and the Kaplan-Meier estimators are less affected by high censoring rates and low response rates. The bias of the method based on the marginal mean model increases rapidly with increase in censoring rate compared to the other two methods. We apply the three methods to a leukemia clinical trial dataset and also compare the results.