Borja G Lopez-Rey, Gerard Carot-Sans, Dan Ouchi, Ferran Torres, Caridad Pontes
{"title":"Use of Bayesian approaches in oncology clinical trials: A cross-sectional analysis.","authors":"Borja G Lopez-Rey, Gerard Carot-Sans, Dan Ouchi, Ferran Torres, Caridad Pontes","doi":"10.3389/fphar.2025.1548997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Bayesian approaches may improve the efficiency of trials and accelerate decision-making, but reluctance to depart from traditional frequentist statistics may limit their use. Because oncology trials generally involve severe conditions with no or limited therapeutic options, they are well-suited to applying Bayesian methodologies and are perceived as using these methods often in early phases.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, we aim to describe the use of Bayesian methods and designs in oncology clinical trials in the last 20 years.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A cross-sectional observational study was conducted to identify oncology clinical trials using Bayesian approaches registered in clinicaltrials.gov between 2004 and 2024. Trials were searched in clinicaltrials.gov, PubMed, and through manual search of cross-references.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bayesian trials were retrieved, and their main characteristics were extracted using R and verified manually. Between 2004 and 2024, 384,298 trials were registered in clinicaltrials.gov; we identified 84,850 oncology clinical trials (22%), of which 640 (0.75%) used Bayesian approaches. The adoption of Bayesian trials increased significantly after 2011, but while half of all Bayesian studies started in the last 5 years, this paralleled the overall increase in oncology research rather than an increase in the proportion of Bayesian trials. The majority of Bayesian trials were phase 1 and phase 2 studies, and two-thirds of Bayesian trials with efficacy objectives had single-arm designs, often utilizing binary endpoints, such as overall response, as the primary measure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The uptake of Bayesian methods in oncology clinical trials has flattened and is still scarce, and is mostly applied to the analysis of treatment efficacy in single-arm trials with binary endpoints. There is room for further uptake and use of their potential advantages in settings with small populations and severe conditions with unmet needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":12491,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","volume":"16 ","pages":"1548997"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11975924/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2025.1548997","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Bayesian approaches may improve the efficiency of trials and accelerate decision-making, but reluctance to depart from traditional frequentist statistics may limit their use. Because oncology trials generally involve severe conditions with no or limited therapeutic options, they are well-suited to applying Bayesian methodologies and are perceived as using these methods often in early phases.
Objectives: In this study, we aim to describe the use of Bayesian methods and designs in oncology clinical trials in the last 20 years.
Method: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted to identify oncology clinical trials using Bayesian approaches registered in clinicaltrials.gov between 2004 and 2024. Trials were searched in clinicaltrials.gov, PubMed, and through manual search of cross-references.
Results: Bayesian trials were retrieved, and their main characteristics were extracted using R and verified manually. Between 2004 and 2024, 384,298 trials were registered in clinicaltrials.gov; we identified 84,850 oncology clinical trials (22%), of which 640 (0.75%) used Bayesian approaches. The adoption of Bayesian trials increased significantly after 2011, but while half of all Bayesian studies started in the last 5 years, this paralleled the overall increase in oncology research rather than an increase in the proportion of Bayesian trials. The majority of Bayesian trials were phase 1 and phase 2 studies, and two-thirds of Bayesian trials with efficacy objectives had single-arm designs, often utilizing binary endpoints, such as overall response, as the primary measure.
Conclusion: The uptake of Bayesian methods in oncology clinical trials has flattened and is still scarce, and is mostly applied to the analysis of treatment efficacy in single-arm trials with binary endpoints. There is room for further uptake and use of their potential advantages in settings with small populations and severe conditions with unmet needs.
期刊介绍：
Frontiers in Pharmacology is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across disciplines, including basic and clinical pharmacology, medicinal chemistry, pharmacy and toxicology. Field Chief Editor Heike Wulff at UC Davis is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
