Cargando…
Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches
This study presents a pharmacokinetic‐pharmacodynamic based clinical trial simulation framework for evaluating the performance of a fixed‐sample Bayesian design (BD) and two alternative Bayesian sequential designs (BSDs) (i.e., a non‐hierarchical (NON‐H) and a semi‐hierarchical (SEMI‐H) one). Prior...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4999603/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27530374 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/psp4.12092 |
_version_ | 1782450151641579520 |
---|---|
author | Smania, G Baiardi, P Ceci, A Cella, M Magni, P |
author_facet | Smania, G Baiardi, P Ceci, A Cella, M Magni, P |
author_sort | Smania, G |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study presents a pharmacokinetic‐pharmacodynamic based clinical trial simulation framework for evaluating the performance of a fixed‐sample Bayesian design (BD) and two alternative Bayesian sequential designs (BSDs) (i.e., a non‐hierarchical (NON‐H) and a semi‐hierarchical (SEMI‐H) one). Prior information was elicited from adult trials and weighted based on the expected similarity of response to treatment between the pediatric and adult populations. Study designs were evaluated in terms of: type I and II errors, sample size per arm (SS), trial duration (TD), and estimate precision. No substantial differences were observed between NON‐H and SEMI‐H. BSDs require, on average, smaller SS and TD compared to the BD, which, on the other hand, guarantees higher estimate precision. When large differences between children and adults are expected, BSDs can return very large SS. Bayesian approaches appear to outperform their frequentist counterparts in the design of pediatric trials even when little weight is given to prior information from adults. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4999603 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49996032016-09-07 Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches Smania, G Baiardi, P Ceci, A Cella, M Magni, P CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol Original Articles This study presents a pharmacokinetic‐pharmacodynamic based clinical trial simulation framework for evaluating the performance of a fixed‐sample Bayesian design (BD) and two alternative Bayesian sequential designs (BSDs) (i.e., a non‐hierarchical (NON‐H) and a semi‐hierarchical (SEMI‐H) one). Prior information was elicited from adult trials and weighted based on the expected similarity of response to treatment between the pediatric and adult populations. Study designs were evaluated in terms of: type I and II errors, sample size per arm (SS), trial duration (TD), and estimate precision. No substantial differences were observed between NON‐H and SEMI‐H. BSDs require, on average, smaller SS and TD compared to the BD, which, on the other hand, guarantees higher estimate precision. When large differences between children and adults are expected, BSDs can return very large SS. Bayesian approaches appear to outperform their frequentist counterparts in the design of pediatric trials even when little weight is given to prior information from adults. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-08-17 2016-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4999603/ /pubmed/27530374 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/psp4.12092 Text en © 2016 The Authors CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Smania, G Baiardi, P Ceci, A Cella, M Magni, P Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches |
title | Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches |
title_full | Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches |
title_fullStr | Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches |
title_full_unstemmed | Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches |
title_short | Model‐Based Assessment of Alternative Study Designs in Pediatric Trials. Part II: Bayesian Approaches |
title_sort | model‐based assessment of alternative study designs in pediatric trials. part ii: bayesian approaches |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4999603/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27530374 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/psp4.12092 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT smaniag modelbasedassessmentofalternativestudydesignsinpediatrictrialspartiibayesianapproaches AT baiardip modelbasedassessmentofalternativestudydesignsinpediatrictrialspartiibayesianapproaches AT cecia modelbasedassessmentofalternativestudydesignsinpediatrictrialspartiibayesianapproaches AT cellam modelbasedassessmentofalternativestudydesignsinpediatrictrialspartiibayesianapproaches AT magnip modelbasedassessmentofalternativestudydesignsinpediatrictrialspartiibayesianapproaches |