Bayesian modelling strategies for borrowing of information in randomised basket trials

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Luke O. Ouma, Michael J. Grayling, James M. S. Wason, Haiyan Zheng
{"title":"Bayesian modelling strategies for borrowing of information in randomised basket trials","authors":"Luke O. Ouma,&nbsp;Michael J. Grayling,&nbsp;James M. S. Wason,&nbsp;Haiyan Zheng","doi":"10.1111/rssc.12602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Basket trials are an innovative precision medicine clinical trial design evaluating a single targeted therapy across multiple diseases that share a common characteristic. To date, most basket trials have been conducted in early-phase oncology settings, for which several Bayesian methods permitting information sharing across subtrials have been proposed. With the increasing interest of implementing randomised basket trials, information borrowing could be exploited in two ways; considering the commensurability of either the treatment effects or the outcomes specific to each of the treatment groups between the subtrials. In this article, we extend a previous analysis model based on distributional discrepancy for borrowing over the subtrial treatment effects (‘treatment effect borrowing’, TEB) to borrowing over the subtrial groupwise responses (‘treatment response borrowing’, TRB). Simulation results demonstrate that both modelling strategies provide substantial gains over an approach with no borrowing. TRB outperforms TEB especially when subtrial sample sizes are small on all operational characteristics, while the latter has considerable gains in performance over TRB when subtrial sample sizes are large, or the treatment effects and groupwise mean responses are noticeably heterogeneous across subtrials. Further, we notice that TRB, and TEB can potentially lead to different conclusions in the analysis of real data.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9827857/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rssc.12602","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Basket trials are an innovative precision medicine clinical trial design evaluating a single targeted therapy across multiple diseases that share a common characteristic. To date, most basket trials have been conducted in early-phase oncology settings, for which several Bayesian methods permitting information sharing across subtrials have been proposed. With the increasing interest of implementing randomised basket trials, information borrowing could be exploited in two ways; considering the commensurability of either the treatment effects or the outcomes specific to each of the treatment groups between the subtrials. In this article, we extend a previous analysis model based on distributional discrepancy for borrowing over the subtrial treatment effects (‘treatment effect borrowing’, TEB) to borrowing over the subtrial groupwise responses (‘treatment response borrowing’, TRB). Simulation results demonstrate that both modelling strategies provide substantial gains over an approach with no borrowing. TRB outperforms TEB especially when subtrial sample sizes are small on all operational characteristics, while the latter has considerable gains in performance over TRB when subtrial sample sizes are large, or the treatment effects and groupwise mean responses are noticeably heterogeneous across subtrials. Further, we notice that TRB, and TEB can potentially lead to different conclusions in the analysis of real data.

Abstract Image

随机篮子试验中信息借鉴的贝叶斯建模策略。
篮子试验是一种创新的精准医学临床试验设计,用于评估具有共同特征的多种疾病的单一靶向治疗。到目前为止,大多数篮子试验都是在早期肿瘤学环境中进行的,已经提出了几种允许在子树之间共享信息的贝叶斯方法。随着人们对实施随机篮子试验越来越感兴趣,信息借用可以通过两种方式加以利用;考虑治疗效果或每个治疗组特有的结果在子树之间的可公度。在这篇文章中,我们将先前基于亚治疗效应的借款分布差异的分析模型(“治疗效应借款”,TEB)扩展到亚治疗组反应的借款(“治疗反应借款”,TRB)。仿真结果表明,与不借款的方法相比,这两种建模策略都提供了实质性的收益。TRB的性能优于TEB,尤其是当减法样本量在所有操作特性上都很小时,而当减法样本大时,或者处理效果和分组平均响应在减法之间明显不同时,后者在性能上比TRB有相当大的提高。此外,我们注意到TRB和TEB在实际数据分析中可能会导致不同的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信