The Use of Local and Nonlocal Priors in Bayesian Test-based Monitoring for Single-arm Phase II Clinical Trials

Overview

Journal Pharm Stat

Publisher Wiley

Specialties Pharmacology
Public Health

Date 2021 May 19

PMID 34008317

Citations 1

Authors

Yanhong Zhou

Ruitao Lin

J Jack Lee

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Bayesian sequential monitoring is widely used in adaptive phase II studies where the objective is to examine whether an experimental drug is efficacious. Common approaches for Bayesian sequential monitoring are based on posterior or predictive probabilities and Bayesian hypothesis testing procedures using Bayes factors. In the first part of the paper, we briefly show the connections between test-based (TB) and posterior probability-based (PB) sequential monitoring approaches. Next, we extensively investigate the choice of local and nonlocal priors for the TB monitoring procedure. We describe the pros and cons of different priors in terms of operating characteristics. We also develop a user-friendly Shiny application to implement the TB design.

Citing Articles

Bayesian single-to-double arm transition design using both short-term and long-term endpoints.

Xu T, Shi H, Lin R Pharm Stat. 2023; 22(4):588-604.

PMID: 36755420 PMC: 11323481. DOI: 10.1002/pst.2292.

References

Thall P, Simon R . Practical Bayesian guidelines for phase IIB clinical trials. Biometrics. 1994; 50(2):337-49. View

Conaway M, Petroni G . Designs for phase II trials allowing for a trade-off between response and toxicity. Biometrics. 1996; 52(4):1375-86. View

Chang M, Therneau T, Wieand H, Cha S . Designs for group sequential phase II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1987; 43(4):865-74. View

Morita S, Thall P, Muller P . Evaluating the Impact of Prior Assumptions in Bayesian Biostatistics. Stat Biosci. 2010; 2(1):1-17. PMC: 2910452. DOI: 10.1007/s12561-010-9018-x. View

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

Simon R . Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1989; 10(1):1-10. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90015-9. View

Quan H, Zhang B, Lan Y, Luo X, Chen X . Bayesian hypothesis testing with frequentist characteristics in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2019; 87:105858. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2019.105858. View

Jacob L, Uvarova M, Boulet S, Begaj I, Chevret S . Evaluation of a multi-arm multi-stage Bayesian design for phase II drug selection trials - an example in hemato-oncology. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016; 16:67. PMC: 5399439. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0166-7. View

Zhou H, Lee J, Yuan Y . BOP2: Bayesian optimal design for phase II clinical trials with simple and complex endpoints. Stat Med. 2017; 36(21):3302-3314. DOI: 10.1002/sim.7338. View

10.

Zhou H, Liu F, Wu C, Rubin E, Giranda V, Chen C . Optimal two-stage designs for exploratory basket trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2019; 85:105807. DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2019.06.021. View

11.

Thall P, Russell K . A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes in phase I/II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1998; 54(1):251-64. View

12.

Lin R, Zhou Y, Yan F, Li D, Yuan Y . BOIN12: Bayesian Optimal Interval Phase I/II Trial Design for Utility-Based Dose Finding in Immunotherapy and Targeted Therapies. JCO Precis Oncol. 2020; 4. PMC: 7713525. DOI: 10.1200/PO.20.00257. View

13.

Yin G, Chen N, Lee J . Phase II trial design with Bayesian adaptive randomization and predictive probability. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2013; 61(2):219-35. PMC: 3832255. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9876.2011.01006.x. View

14.

Spiegelhalter D, Freedman L, Blackburn P . Monitoring clinical trials: conditional or predictive power?. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7(1):8-17. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90003-6. View

15.

MALEC D . A closer look at combining data among a small number of binomial experiments. Stat Med. 2001; 20(12):1811-24. DOI: 10.1002/sim.782. View

16.

Heitjan D . Bayesian interim analysis of phase II cancer clinical trials. Stat Med. 1997; 16(16):1791-802. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19970830)16:16<1791::aid-sim609>3.0.co;2-e. View

17.

Shan G, Gerstenberger S . Fisher's exact approach for post hoc analysis of a chi-squared test. PLoS One. 2017; 12(12):e0188709. PMC: 5737889. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188709. View

18.

Zhou Y, Lee J, Yuan Y . A utility-based Bayesian optimal interval (U-BOIN) phase I/II design to identify the optimal biological dose for targeted and immune therapies. Stat Med. 2019; 38(28):5299-5316. PMC: 7927960. DOI: 10.1002/sim.8361. View

19.

Guo B, Li Y . Bayesian designs of phase II oncology trials to select maximum effective dose assuming monotonic dose-response relationship. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014; 14:95. PMC: 4119476. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-95. View

20.

Li J, Chen W, Scott J . Addressing prior-data conflict with empirical meta-analytic-predictive priors in clinical studies with historical information. J Biopharm Stat. 2016; 26(6):1056-1066. DOI: 10.1080/10543406.2016.1226324. View