Bayesian Solutions for Assessing Differential Effects in Biomarker Positive and Negative Subgroups.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Pharmaceutical Statistics Pub Date : 2024-11-25 DOI:10.1002/pst.2456
Dan Jackson, Fanni Zhang, Carl-Fredrik Burman, Linda Sharples
{"title":"Bayesian Solutions for Assessing Differential Effects in Biomarker Positive and Negative Subgroups.","authors":"Dan Jackson, Fanni Zhang, Carl-Fredrik Burman, Linda Sharples","doi":"10.1002/pst.2456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The number of clinical trials that include a binary biomarker in design and analysis has risen due to the advent of personalised medicine. This presents challenges for medical decision makers because a drug may confer a stronger effect in the biomarker positive group, and so be approved either in this subgroup alone or in the all-comer population. We develop and evaluate Bayesian methods that can be used to assess this. All our methods are based on the same statistical model for the observed data but we propose different prior specifications to express differing degrees of knowledge about the extent to which the treatment may be more effective in one subgroup than the other. We illustrate our methods using some real examples. We also show how our methodology is useful when designing trials where the size of the biomarker negative subgroup is to be determined. We conclude that our Bayesian framework is a natural tool for making decisions, for example, whether to recommend using the treatment in the biomarker negative subgroup where the treatment is less likely to be efficacious, or determining the number of biomarker positive and negative patients to include when designing a trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":19934,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaceutical Statistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaceutical Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.2456","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The number of clinical trials that include a binary biomarker in design and analysis has risen due to the advent of personalised medicine. This presents challenges for medical decision makers because a drug may confer a stronger effect in the biomarker positive group, and so be approved either in this subgroup alone or in the all-comer population. We develop and evaluate Bayesian methods that can be used to assess this. All our methods are based on the same statistical model for the observed data but we propose different prior specifications to express differing degrees of knowledge about the extent to which the treatment may be more effective in one subgroup than the other. We illustrate our methods using some real examples. We also show how our methodology is useful when designing trials where the size of the biomarker negative subgroup is to be determined. We conclude that our Bayesian framework is a natural tool for making decisions, for example, whether to recommend using the treatment in the biomarker negative subgroup where the treatment is less likely to be efficacious, or determining the number of biomarker positive and negative patients to include when designing a trial.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
由于个性化医疗的出现,在设计和分析中包含二元生物标志物的临床试验数量有所增加。这给医疗决策者带来了挑战,因为一种药物可能会在生物标志物阳性组中产生更强的疗效,因此无论是在这一亚组还是在所有组别中都会获得批准。我们开发并评估了可用于评估的贝叶斯方法。我们的所有方法都基于相同的观察数据统计模型,但我们提出了不同的先验规范,以表达对治疗在一个亚组中比在另一个亚组中更有效的程度的不同认识。我们将使用一些实际案例来说明我们的方法。我们还展示了在设计需要确定生物标志物阴性亚组规模的试验时,我们的方法是如何发挥作用的。我们的结论是,我们的贝叶斯框架是一种自然的决策工具,例如,是否建议在生物标志物阴性亚组中使用疗效较差的治疗方法,或者在设计试验时确定生物标志物阳性和阴性患者的数量。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Pharmaceutical Statistics
Pharmaceutical Statistics 医学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
90
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pharmaceutical Statistics is an industry-led initiative, tackling real problems in statistical applications. The Journal publishes papers that share experiences in the practical application of statistics within the pharmaceutical industry. It covers all aspects of pharmaceutical statistical applications from discovery, through pre-clinical development, clinical development, post-marketing surveillance, consumer health, production, epidemiology, and health economics. The Journal is both international and multidisciplinary. It includes high quality practical papers, case studies and review papers.
期刊最新文献
Bayesian Solutions for Assessing Differential Effects in Biomarker Positive and Negative Subgroups. Pre-Posterior Distributions in Drug Development and Their Properties. Beyond the Fragility Index. A Model-Based Trial Design With a Randomization Scheme Considering Pharmacokinetics Exposure for Dose Optimization in Oncology. Potential Bias Models With Bayesian Shrinkage Priors for Dynamic Borrowing of Multiple Historical Control Data.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1