SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2508.18815

Blinded sample size recalculation in randomized controlled trials with analysis of covariance

Abstract

In randomized controlled trials, covariate adjustment can improve statistical power and reduce the required sample size compared with unadjusted estimators. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is often used to adjust for baseline covariates when outcomes are continuous. To design a sample size based on ANCOVA, it is necessary to prespecify the association between the outcome and baseline covariates, as well as among the baseline covariates themselves. However, determining these parameters at the design stage is challenging. Although it may be possible to adaptively assess these during the trial and recalculate the required sample size, existing sample size recalculation methods assume that the joint distribution of the outcome and baseline covariates is multivariate normal, which is not always the case in practice. In this study, we propose a blinded sample size recalculation method for the ANCOVA estimator based on the asymptotic relative efficiency under minimal distributional assumptions, thus accommodating arbitrary model misspecification. The proposed method is able to achieve the nominal power and reduce the required sample size without inflating the type I error rate in the final analysis. We conducted simulations to evaluate the performance of the proposed method under various scenarios. Applied to an HIV clinical trial, the proposed method reduced the required sample size by up to one-third compared to the unadjusted analysis, despite occasional slight increases.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Takumi Kanata, Yasuhiro Hagiwara, Koji Oba. 2025-08-26. Blinded sample size recalculation in randomized controlled trials with analysis of covariance. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomtc%2Fujag147

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME