Cargando…

Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study

BACKGROUND: Bayesian adaptive designs can be more efficient than traditional methods for multi-arm randomised controlled trials. The aim of this work was to demonstrate how Bayesian adaptive designs can be constructed for multi-arm phase III clinical trials and assess potential benefits that these d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ryan, Elizabeth G., Lamb, Sarah E., Williamson, Esther, Gates, Simon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6961269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31937341
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-4021-0
_version_ 1783487955324633088
author Ryan, Elizabeth G.
Lamb, Sarah E.
Williamson, Esther
Gates, Simon
author_facet Ryan, Elizabeth G.
Lamb, Sarah E.
Williamson, Esther
Gates, Simon
author_sort Ryan, Elizabeth G.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Bayesian adaptive designs can be more efficient than traditional methods for multi-arm randomised controlled trials. The aim of this work was to demonstrate how Bayesian adaptive designs can be constructed for multi-arm phase III clinical trials and assess potential benefits that these designs offer. METHODS: We constructed several alternative Bayesian adaptive designs for the Collaborative Ankle Support Trial (CAST), which was a randomised controlled trial that compared four treatments for severe ankle sprain. These designs incorporated response adaptive randomisation (RAR), arm dropping, and early stopping for efficacy or futility. We studied the operating characteristics of the Bayesian designs via simulation. We then virtually re-executed the trial by implementing the Bayesian adaptive designs using patient data sampled from the CAST study to demonstrate the practical applicability of the designs. RESULTS: We constructed five Bayesian adaptive designs, each of which had high power and recruited fewer patients on average than the original designs target sample size. The virtual executions showed that most of the Bayesian designs would have led to trials that declared superiority of one of the interventions over the control. Bayesian adaptive designs with RAR or arm dropping were more likely to allocate patients to better performing arms at each interim analysis. Similar estimates and conclusions were obtained from the Bayesian adaptive designs as from the original trial. CONCLUSIONS: Using CAST as an example, this case study shows how Bayesian adaptive designs can be constructed for phase III multi-arm trials using clinically relevant decision criteria. These designs demonstrated that they can potentially generate earlier results and allocate more patients to better performing arms. We recommend the wider use of Bayesian adaptive approaches in phase III clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CAST study registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN37807450. Retrospectively registered on 25 April 2003.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6961269
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69612692020-01-17 Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study Ryan, Elizabeth G. Lamb, Sarah E. Williamson, Esther Gates, Simon Trials Methodology BACKGROUND: Bayesian adaptive designs can be more efficient than traditional methods for multi-arm randomised controlled trials. The aim of this work was to demonstrate how Bayesian adaptive designs can be constructed for multi-arm phase III clinical trials and assess potential benefits that these designs offer. METHODS: We constructed several alternative Bayesian adaptive designs for the Collaborative Ankle Support Trial (CAST), which was a randomised controlled trial that compared four treatments for severe ankle sprain. These designs incorporated response adaptive randomisation (RAR), arm dropping, and early stopping for efficacy or futility. We studied the operating characteristics of the Bayesian designs via simulation. We then virtually re-executed the trial by implementing the Bayesian adaptive designs using patient data sampled from the CAST study to demonstrate the practical applicability of the designs. RESULTS: We constructed five Bayesian adaptive designs, each of which had high power and recruited fewer patients on average than the original designs target sample size. The virtual executions showed that most of the Bayesian designs would have led to trials that declared superiority of one of the interventions over the control. Bayesian adaptive designs with RAR or arm dropping were more likely to allocate patients to better performing arms at each interim analysis. Similar estimates and conclusions were obtained from the Bayesian adaptive designs as from the original trial. CONCLUSIONS: Using CAST as an example, this case study shows how Bayesian adaptive designs can be constructed for phase III multi-arm trials using clinically relevant decision criteria. These designs demonstrated that they can potentially generate earlier results and allocate more patients to better performing arms. We recommend the wider use of Bayesian adaptive approaches in phase III clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CAST study registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN37807450. Retrospectively registered on 25 April 2003. BioMed Central 2020-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6961269/ /pubmed/31937341 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-4021-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis 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 Methodology
Ryan, Elizabeth G.
Lamb, Sarah E.
Williamson, Esther
Gates, Simon
Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
title Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
title_full Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
title_fullStr Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
title_full_unstemmed Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
title_short Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
title_sort bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6961269/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31937341
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-4021-0
work_keys_str_mv AT ryanelizabethg bayesianadaptivedesignsformultiarmtrialsanorthopaediccasestudy
AT lambsarahe bayesianadaptivedesignsformultiarmtrialsanorthopaediccasestudy
AT williamsonesther bayesianadaptivedesignsformultiarmtrialsanorthopaediccasestudy
AT gatessimon bayesianadaptivedesignsformultiarmtrialsanorthopaediccasestudy