Cargando…

Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis

BACKGROUND: Bayesian methods have potential for efficient design of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by incorporating existing evidence. Furthermore, value of information (VOI) methods estimate the value of reducing decision uncertainty, aiding transparent research prioritization. These methods req...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Glynn, David, Nikolaidis, Georgios, Jankovic, Dina, Welton, Nicky J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10336712/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37057388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X231165985
_version_ 1785071266865086464
author Glynn, David
Nikolaidis, Georgios
Jankovic, Dina
Welton, Nicky J.
author_facet Glynn, David
Nikolaidis, Georgios
Jankovic, Dina
Welton, Nicky J.
author_sort Glynn, David
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Bayesian methods have potential for efficient design of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by incorporating existing evidence. Furthermore, value of information (VOI) methods estimate the value of reducing decision uncertainty, aiding transparent research prioritization. These methods require a prior distribution describing current uncertainty in key parameters, such as relative treatment effect (RTE). However, at the time of designing and commissioning research, there may be no data to base the prior on. The aim of this article is to present methods to construct priors for RTEs based on a collection of previous RCTs. METHODS: We developed 2 Bayesian hierarchical models that captured variability in RTE between studies within disease area accounting for study characteristics. We illustrate the methods using a data set of 743 published RCTs across 9 disease areas to obtain predictive distributions for RTEs for a range of disease areas. We illustrate how the priors from such an analysis can be used in a VOI analysis for an RCT in bladder cancer and compare the results with those using an uninformative prior. RESULTS: For most disease areas, the predicted RTE favored new interventions over comparators. The predicted effects and uncertainty differed across the 9 disease areas. VOI analysis showed that the expected value of research is much lower with our empirically derived prior compared with an uninformative prior. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a novel approach to generating informative priors that can be used to aid research prioritization and trial design. The methods can also be used to combine RCT evidence with expert opinion. Further work is needed to create a rich database of RCT evidence that can be used to form off-the-shelf priors. HIGHLIGHTS: Bayesian methods have potential to aid the efficient design of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by incorporating existing evidence. Value-of-information (VOI) methods can be used to aid research prioritization by calculating the value of current decision uncertainty. These methods require a distribution describing current uncertainty in key parameters, that is, “prior distributions.”. This article demonstrates a methodology to estimate prior distributions for relative treatment effects (odds and hazard ratios) estimated from a collection of previous RCTs. These results may be combined with expert elicitation to facilitate 1) value-of-information methods to prioritize research or 2) Bayesian methods for research design.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10336712
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103367122023-07-13 Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis Glynn, David Nikolaidis, Georgios Jankovic, Dina Welton, Nicky J. Med Decis Making Original Research Articles BACKGROUND: Bayesian methods have potential for efficient design of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by incorporating existing evidence. Furthermore, value of information (VOI) methods estimate the value of reducing decision uncertainty, aiding transparent research prioritization. These methods require a prior distribution describing current uncertainty in key parameters, such as relative treatment effect (RTE). However, at the time of designing and commissioning research, there may be no data to base the prior on. The aim of this article is to present methods to construct priors for RTEs based on a collection of previous RCTs. METHODS: We developed 2 Bayesian hierarchical models that captured variability in RTE between studies within disease area accounting for study characteristics. We illustrate the methods using a data set of 743 published RCTs across 9 disease areas to obtain predictive distributions for RTEs for a range of disease areas. We illustrate how the priors from such an analysis can be used in a VOI analysis for an RCT in bladder cancer and compare the results with those using an uninformative prior. RESULTS: For most disease areas, the predicted RTE favored new interventions over comparators. The predicted effects and uncertainty differed across the 9 disease areas. VOI analysis showed that the expected value of research is much lower with our empirically derived prior compared with an uninformative prior. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a novel approach to generating informative priors that can be used to aid research prioritization and trial design. The methods can also be used to combine RCT evidence with expert opinion. Further work is needed to create a rich database of RCT evidence that can be used to form off-the-shelf priors. HIGHLIGHTS: Bayesian methods have potential to aid the efficient design of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by incorporating existing evidence. Value-of-information (VOI) methods can be used to aid research prioritization by calculating the value of current decision uncertainty. These methods require a distribution describing current uncertainty in key parameters, that is, “prior distributions.”. This article demonstrates a methodology to estimate prior distributions for relative treatment effects (odds and hazard ratios) estimated from a collection of previous RCTs. These results may be combined with expert elicitation to facilitate 1) value-of-information methods to prioritize research or 2) Bayesian methods for research design. SAGE Publications 2023-04-14 2023-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10336712/ /pubmed/37057388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X231165985 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Research Articles
Glynn, David
Nikolaidis, Georgios
Jankovic, Dina
Welton, Nicky J.
Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis
title Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis
title_full Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis
title_fullStr Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis
title_short Constructing Relative Effect Priors for Research Prioritization and Trial Design: A Meta-epidemiological Analysis
title_sort constructing relative effect priors for research prioritization and trial design: a meta-epidemiological analysis
topic Original Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10336712/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37057388
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X231165985
work_keys_str_mv AT glynndavid constructingrelativeeffectpriorsforresearchprioritizationandtrialdesignametaepidemiologicalanalysis
AT nikolaidisgeorgios constructingrelativeeffectpriorsforresearchprioritizationandtrialdesignametaepidemiologicalanalysis
AT jankovicdina constructingrelativeeffectpriorsforresearchprioritizationandtrialdesignametaepidemiologicalanalysis
AT weltonnickyj constructingrelativeeffectpriorsforresearchprioritizationandtrialdesignametaepidemiologicalanalysis