Cargando…

Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs

BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in the use of Bayesian adaptive designs in late-phase clinical trials. This includes the use of stopping rules based on Bayesian analyses in which the frequentist type I error rate is controlled as in frequentist group-sequential designs. METHODS: This paper p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stallard, Nigel, Todd, Susan, Ryan, Elizabeth G., Gates, Simon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6947872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31910813
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0892-8
_version_ 1783485644120522752
author Stallard, Nigel
Todd, Susan
Ryan, Elizabeth G.
Gates, Simon
author_facet Stallard, Nigel
Todd, Susan
Ryan, Elizabeth G.
Gates, Simon
author_sort Stallard, Nigel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in the use of Bayesian adaptive designs in late-phase clinical trials. This includes the use of stopping rules based on Bayesian analyses in which the frequentist type I error rate is controlled as in frequentist group-sequential designs. METHODS: This paper presents a practical comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential tests. Focussing on the setting in which data can be summarised by normally distributed test statistics, we evaluate and compare boundary values and operating characteristics. RESULTS: Although Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential approaches are based on fundamentally different paradigms, in a single arm trial or two-arm comparative trial with a prior distribution specified for the treatment difference, Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential tests can have identical stopping rules if particular critical values with which the posterior probability is compared or particular spending function values are chosen. If the Bayesian critical values at different looks are restricted to be equal, O’Brien and Fleming’s design corresponds to a Bayesian design with an exceptionally informative negative prior, Pocock’s design to a Bayesian design with a non-informative prior and frequentist designs with a linear alpha spending function are very similar to Bayesian designs with slightly informative priors.This contrasts with the setting of a comparative trial with independent prior distributions specified for treatment effects in different groups. In this case Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential tests cannot have the same stopping rule as the Bayesian stopping rule depends on the observed means in the two groups and not just on their difference. In this setting the Bayesian test can only be guaranteed to control the type I error for a specified range of values of the control group treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of frequentist and Bayesian designs can encourage careful thought about design parameters and help to ensure appropriate design choices are made.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6947872
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69478722020-01-09 Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs Stallard, Nigel Todd, Susan Ryan, Elizabeth G. Gates, Simon BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in the use of Bayesian adaptive designs in late-phase clinical trials. This includes the use of stopping rules based on Bayesian analyses in which the frequentist type I error rate is controlled as in frequentist group-sequential designs. METHODS: This paper presents a practical comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential tests. Focussing on the setting in which data can be summarised by normally distributed test statistics, we evaluate and compare boundary values and operating characteristics. RESULTS: Although Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential approaches are based on fundamentally different paradigms, in a single arm trial or two-arm comparative trial with a prior distribution specified for the treatment difference, Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential tests can have identical stopping rules if particular critical values with which the posterior probability is compared or particular spending function values are chosen. If the Bayesian critical values at different looks are restricted to be equal, O’Brien and Fleming’s design corresponds to a Bayesian design with an exceptionally informative negative prior, Pocock’s design to a Bayesian design with a non-informative prior and frequentist designs with a linear alpha spending function are very similar to Bayesian designs with slightly informative priors.This contrasts with the setting of a comparative trial with independent prior distributions specified for treatment effects in different groups. In this case Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential tests cannot have the same stopping rule as the Bayesian stopping rule depends on the observed means in the two groups and not just on their difference. In this setting the Bayesian test can only be guaranteed to control the type I error for a specified range of values of the control group treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of frequentist and Bayesian designs can encourage careful thought about design parameters and help to ensure appropriate design choices are made. BioMed Central 2020-01-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6947872/ /pubmed/31910813 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0892-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver(http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Stallard, Nigel
Todd, Susan
Ryan, Elizabeth G.
Gates, Simon
Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs
title Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs
title_full Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs
title_fullStr Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs
title_short Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs
title_sort comparison of bayesian and frequentist group-sequential clinical trial designs
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6947872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31910813
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0892-8
work_keys_str_mv AT stallardnigel comparisonofbayesianandfrequentistgroupsequentialclinicaltrialdesigns
AT toddsusan comparisonofbayesianandfrequentistgroupsequentialclinicaltrialdesigns
AT ryanelizabethg comparisonofbayesianandfrequentistgroupsequentialclinicaltrialdesigns
AT gatessimon comparisonofbayesianandfrequentistgroupsequentialclinicaltrialdesigns