» Articles » PMID: 20668651

Evaluating the Impact of Prior Assumptions in Bayesian Biostatistics

Overview
Journal Stat Biosci
Date 2010 Jul 30
PMID 20668651
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A common concern in Bayesian data analysis is that an inappropriately informative prior may unduly influence posterior inferences. In the context of Bayesian clinical trial design, well chosen priors are important to ensure that posterior-based decision rules have good frequentist properties. However, it is difficult to quantify prior information in all but the most stylized models. This issue may be addressed by quantifying the prior information in terms of a number of hypothetical patients, i.e., a prior effective sample size (ESS). Prior ESS provides a useful tool for understanding the impact of prior assumptions. For example, the prior ESS may be used to guide calibration of prior variances and other hyperprior parameters. In this paper, we discuss such prior sensitivity analyses by using a recently proposed method to compute a prior ESS. We apply this in several typical Bayesian biomedical data analysis and clinical trial design settings. The data analyses include cross-tabulated counts, multiple correlated diagnostic tests, and ordinal outcomes using a proportional-odds model. The study designs include a phase I trial with late-onset toxicities, a phase II trial that monitors event times, and a phase I/II trial with dose-finding based on efficacy and toxicity.

Citing Articles

BayesESS: A tool for quantifying the impact of parametric priors in Bayesian analysis.

Song J, Morita S, Kuo Y, Lee J SoftwareX. 2023; 22.

PMID: 37377886 PMC: 10299797. DOI: 10.1016/j.softx.2023.101358.


The use of local and nonlocal priors in Bayesian test-based monitoring for single-arm phase II clinical trials.

Zhou Y, Lin R, Lee J Pharm Stat. 2021; 20(6):1183-1199.

PMID: 34008317 PMC: 9308506. DOI: 10.1002/pst.2139.


Prior Elicitation for Use in Clinical Trial Design and Analysis: A Literature Review.

Azzolina D, Berchialla P, Gregori D, Baldi I Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(4).

PMID: 33668623 PMC: 7917693. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18041833.


An adaptive power prior for sequential clinical trials - Application to bridging studies.

Ollier A, Morita S, Ursino M, Zohar S Stat Methods Med Res. 2019; 29(8):2282-2294.

PMID: 31729275 PMC: 7433690. DOI: 10.1177/0962280219886609.


Motivating sample sizes in adaptive Phase I trials via Bayesian posterior credible intervals.

Braun T Biometrics. 2018; 74(3):1065-1071.

PMID: 29534298 PMC: 9109046. DOI: 10.1111/biom.12872.


References
1.
Morita S, Thall P, Muller P . Determining the effective sample size of a parametric prior. Biometrics. 2007; 64(2):595-602. PMC: 3081791. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00888.x. View

2.
Elkind M, Sacco R, MacArthur R, Fink D, Peerschke E, Andrews H . The Neuroprotection with Statin Therapy for Acute Recovery Trial (NeuSTART): an adaptive design phase I dose-escalation study of high-dose lovastatin in acute ischemic stroke. Int J Stroke. 2008; 3(3):210-8. PMC: 4130457. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2008.00200.x. View

3.
Thall P, Wooten L, Tannir N . Monitoring event times in early phase clinical trials: some practical issues. Clin Trials. 2006; 2(6):467-78. DOI: 10.1191/1740774505cn121oa. View

4.
Cheung Y, Chappell R . Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late-onset toxicities. Biometrics. 2000; 56(4):1177-82. DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.01177.x. View

5.
Morita S, Thall P, Muller P . Prior Effective Sample Size in Conditionally Independent Hierarchical Models. Bayesian Anal. 2013; 7(3). PMC: 3810292. DOI: 10.1214/12-BA720. View