Dataset Information

A practical guide to pre-trial simulations for Bayesian adaptive trials using SAS and BUGS.

ABSTRACT: It is often unclear what specific adaptive trial design features lead to an efficient design which is also feasible to implement. Before deciding on a particular design, it is generally advisable to carry out a simulation study to characterise the properties of candidate designs under a range of plausible assumptions. The implementation of such pre-trial simulation studies presents many challenges and requires considerable statistical programming effort and time. Despite the scale and complexity, there is little existing literature to guide the implementation of such projects using commonly available software. This Teacher's Corner article provides a practical step-by-step guide to implementing such simulation studies including how to specify and fit a Bayesian model in WinBUGS or OpenBUGS using SAS, and how results from the Bayesian analysis may be pulled back into SAS and used for adaptation of allocation probabilities before simulating subsequent stages of the trial. The interface between the two software platforms is described in detail along with useful tips and tricks. A key strength of our approach is that the entire exercise can be defined and controlled from within a single SAS program.

SUBMITTER: Hansen CH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6283249 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A practical guide to pre-trial simulations for Bayesian adaptive trials using SAS and BUGS.

Hansen Christian Holm CH Warner Pamela P Walker Allan A Parker Richard A RA Whitaker Lucy L Critchley Hilary O D HOD Weir Christopher J CJ

Pharmaceutical statistics 20180914 6

It is often unclear what specific adaptive trial design features lead to an efficient design which is also feasible to implement. Before deciding on a particular design, it is generally advisable to carry out a simulation study to characterise the properties of candidate designs under a range of plausible assumptions. The implementation of such pre-trial simulation studies presents many challenges and requires considerable statistical programming effort and time. Despite the scale and complexity ...[more]

PMID: 30215881

Similar Datasets

Project description:Randomized clinical trials (RCT) increasingly investigate combination therapies. Strong biological rationale or early clinical evidence commonly suggest that the effect of the combination treatment is importantly greater than the maximum effect of any of the individual treatments. While these relationships are commonly well-accepted, RCTs do not incorporate them into the design or analysis plans. We therefore propose a simple Bayesian framework for incorporating the known relationships that the effectiveness of a combination treatment exceeds that of any individual treatment, but does not necessarily exceed the sum of individual effects. We term the collation of these two relationships 'fractional additivity'. We performed a binary outcome simulation study of a response adaptive randomized three-arm clinical trial with treatment arms A, B, and A&B that allowed for dropping an inferior treatment arm and terminating the trial early for superiority during any of 4 interim analyses. We compared the Bayesian fractional additivity model to a conventional analysis by measuring the expected proportion of failures, sample size at trial termination, time to termination, and root mean squared error of final estimates. We also compared the fractional additivity model to a 'full additivity' model where the effect of A&B was assumed to be the sum of the effect of A and B. In simulation scenarios where important fractional additivity or full additivity existed, the Bayesian fractional additivity model yielded a 3-4% relative reduction in expected number of failures, and a 30%-50% relative reduction in sample size at trial termination compared to a conventional analysis. These results held true even when the Bayesian fractional additivity model employed a biased prior. The full additivity model had slightly higher gains, but too frequently terminated the trial at the first interim look. In scenarios where no or weak fractional additivity exists, the expected sample size and time to termination were similar for the Bayesian fractional additivity model with a moderately optimistic bias about fractional additivity and the conventional model. Lastly, the fractional additivity model generally yielded similar or lower root mean squared error compared to the other models. In conclusion, our proposed Bayesian fractional additivity model provides an efficient approach for estimating effects of combination treatments in clinical trials. The approach is not only highly applicable in adaptive clinical trials, but also provides added power in a conventional RCT.

Project description:BackgroundMany clinical trial designs are impractical for community-based clinical intervention trials. Stepped wedge trial designs provide practical advantages, but few descriptions exist of their clinical implementational features, statistical design efficiencies, and limitations.ObjectivesEnhance efficiency of stepped wedge trial designs by evaluating the impact of design characteristics on statistical power for the British Columbia Telehealth Trial.MethodsThe British Columbia Telehealth Trial is a community-based, cluster-randomized, controlled clinical trial in rural and urban British Columbia. To determine the effect of an Internet-based telehealth intervention on healthcare utilization, 1000 subjects with an existing diagnosis of congestive heart failure or type 2 diabetes will be enrolled from 50 clinical practices. Hospital utilization is measured using a composite of disease-specific hospital admissions and emergency visits. The intervention comprises online telehealth data collection and counseling provided to support a disease-specific action plan developed by the primary care provider. The planned intervention is sequentially introduced across all participating practices. We adopt a fully Bayesian, Markov chain Monte Carlo-driven statistical approach, wherein we use simulation to determine the effect of cluster size, sample size, and crossover interval choice on type I error and power to evaluate differences in hospital utilization.ResultsFor our Bayesian stepped wedge trial design, simulations suggest moderate decreases in power when crossover intervals from control to intervention are reduced from every 3 to 2 weeks, and dramatic decreases in power as the numbers of clusters decrease. Power and type I error performance were not notably affected by the addition of nonzero cluster effects or a temporal trend in hospitalization intensity.Conclusion/limitationsStepped wedge trial designs that intervene in small clusters across longer periods can provide enhanced power to evaluate comparative effectiveness, while offering practical implementation advantages in geographic stratification, temporal change, use of existing data, and resource distribution. Current population estimates were used; however, models may not reflect actual event rates during the trial. In addition, temporal or spatial heterogeneity can bias treatment effect estimates.

Project description:BackgroundBayesian 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsWe 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.ConclusionsUsing 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 registrationCAST study registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN37807450. Retrospectively registered on 25 April 2003.

Dataset Information

A practical guide to pre-trial simulations for Bayesian adaptive trials using SAS and BUGS.

Publications

A practical guide to pre-trial simulations for Bayesian adaptive trials using SAS and BUGS.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets