Bayesian clinical trials at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center

Abstract

Background The Bayesian approach is being used increasingly in medical research. In particular, it has become a standard in designing clinical trials at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.

Purpose/Methods To address the extent and nature of Bayesian trials conducted at M. D. Anderson, we reviewed the protocols registered in the Protocol Document Online System between 2000 and early 2005. We summarize our findings and give details for three innovative trials that typify those in which a Bayesian approach has played a major role at the center.

Results Of 964 protocols reviewed, 59% were conducted solely at M. D. Anderson and the rest were multicenter trials. Bayesian designs and analyses were used in about 20% (195/964) of the protocols that we reviewed. Of the 520 protocols identified as phase I or II drug trials, about 34% were Bayesian. Most of the 195 Bayesian trials were designed by M. D. Anderson statisticians. The Bayesian design features most commonly used were the continuous reassessment method in phase I (toxicity) trials, adaptive randomization in phase II trials, and designs to monitor efficacy and toxicity simultaneously. We also provide an insider's view regarding some practical considerations that have made the design and implementation of so many Bayesian trials possible.

Limitations We reviewed only a subset of all M. D. Anderson protocols, but did not exclude any available in electronic form.

Conclusions The large number of Bayesian trials conducted at M. D. Anderson testifies to the receptivity to the Bayesian approach within the center, including principal investigators, regulatory review committees, and patients. Statisticians who take a Bayesian perspective can successfully work to establish a culture of innovation in clinical trial design.

References

Berry DA Bayesian clinical trials. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006; 5: 27-36.

Berry DA Statistical innovations in cancer research. In Holland J , Frei T et al. (eds). Cancer Medicine (7th edn). BC Decker, London, 2005, pp. 411-25.

Leaf C. Deadly caution: How our national obsession with drug safety is killing people - and what we can do about it. Fortune February 9, 2006.

Malakoff D. Statistics: Bayes offers a `new' way to make sense of numbers. Science 1999; 286: 1460-4.

Couzin J. The new math of clinical trials. Science 2004 ; 303: 784-6.

Berry DA Introduction to Bayesian methods III: use and interpretation of Bayesian tools in design and analysis. Clin Trials 2005; 2: 295-300.

Goodman SN Introduction to Bayesian methods I: measuring the strength of evidence . Clin Trials 2005; 2: 282-90.

Louis TA Introduction to Bayesian methods II: fundamental concepts. Clin Trials 2005; 2: 291-4.

Lipscomb B. , Ma G. , Berry DA Bayesian predictions of final outcomes: regulatory approval of a spinal implant . Clin Trials 2005; 2: 325-33.

10.

Lee JJ , Liu DD A predictive probability design for phase II cancer clinical trials . Clin Trials 2008; 5: 93-106.

11.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for the use of Bayesian statistics in medical device clinical trials - draft guidance for industry and FDA staff, May 23, 2006 (Available at: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/osb/guidance/1601.html). Accessed 26 February 2009.

12.

U. S. Food and Drug Administration. Innovation or stagnation? Challenge and opportunity on the critical path to new medical products, 2004. (Available at: http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/whitepaper.pdf ). Accessed 26 February 2009.

13.

O'Neill RT FDA's critical path initiative: a perspective on contributions of biostatistics . Biom J 2006; 48: 559-64.

14.

Berry SM , Berry DA , Natarajan K. et al. Bayesian survival analysis with nonproportional hazards: metanalysis of pravastatin-aspirin. J Am Stat Assoc 2004 ; 99: 36-44.

15.

Hennekens CH , Sacks FM , Tonkin A. et al. Additive benefits of pravastatin and aspirin to decrease risks of cardiovascular disease: randomized and observational comparisons of secondary prevention trials and their meta-analyses . Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 40-4.

16.

Gaydos B. , Krams M. , Perevozskaya I. et al. Adaptive dose-response studies. Drug Inf J 2006; 40: 451-61.

17.

Maca J. , Bhattacharya S. , Dragalin V. et al. Adaptive seamless phase II/III designs: background, operational aspects, and examples. Drug Inf J 2006; 40: 463-73.

18.

American Statistical Association. FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop. (Available at: http://www.amstat.org/meetings/fdaworkshop/index.cfm?fuseaction=main). Accessed 26 February 2009.

19.

Buzdar AU , Ibrahim NK , Francis D. et al. Significantly higher pathologic complete remission rate after neoadjuvant therapy with trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and epirubicin chemotherapy: results of a randomized trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 3676-85.

20.

Giles FJ , Kantarjian HM , Cortes JE et al. Adaptive randomized study of idarubicin and cytarabine (IA) versus troxacitabine and cytarabine (TA) versus troxacitabine and idarubicin (TI) in untreated patients 50 years or older with adverse karyotype acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 1722-27.

21.

Inoue LYT , Berry DA , Parmigiani G. Relationship between Bayesian and frequentist sample size determination. Am Stat 2005; 59: 79-87.

22.

Huang X. , Biswas S. , Oki Y. , Issa J. -P, Berry DA A parallel phase I/II clinical trial design for combination therapies . Biometrics 2007; 63: 429-36.

23.

Zhou X. , Liu S. , Kim ES , Lee JJ Bayesian adaptive design for targeted therapy development in lung cancer-a step toward personalized medicine. Clin Trials 2008; 5: 181-93.

24.

Ashby D. Bayesian statistics in medicine: a 25 year review. Stat Med 2006; 25: 3589-631.

25.

Ameer B. Novel trial design: a report from the 19th frontiers symposium of ACCP. J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 48: 793-98.

26.

Hobbs BP , Carlin BP Practical Bayesian design and analysis for drug and device clinical trials . J Biopharm Stat 2008; 18: 54-80.

27.

Booth CM , Calvert AH , Giaccone G. et al. Design and conduct of phase II studies of targeted anticancer therapy: recommendations from the task force on methodology for the development of innovative cancer therapies (MDICT). Eur J Cancer 2008; 44: 25-9.

28.

Campbell G. Statistics in the world of medical devices: the contrast with pharmaceuticals . J Biopharm Stat 2008; 18: 4-19.

29.

Moyé LA Bayesians in clinical trials: asleep at the switch. Stat Med 2008; 27: 469-82.

30.

Chen M. -H, Ibrahim JG The relationship between the power prior and hierarchical models. Bayesian Anal 2006; 1: 551-74.

31.

Berry DA , Stangl DK Bayesian Biostatistics. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1996.

32.

Spiegelhalter DJ , Abrams KR , Myles JP Bayesian Approaches to Clinical Trials and Health-Care Evaluation . Wiley, West Sussex, England, 2004 , pp. 139-180.

33.

Berry DA Bayesian statistics and the efficiency and ethics of clinical trials . Stat Sci 2004; 19: 175-87.

34.

MRC Biostatistics Unit. WinBUGS and BUGS computer programs (Available at: http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/bugs/). Accessed 23 February 2009.

35.

Lunn DJ , Thomas A. , Best N. , Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS - a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility . Stat Comput 2000; 10: 325-37.

36.

Thomas A. BRugs computer program. (Available at: http://www.biostat.umn.edu/∼brad/software/BRugs/BRugs_install.html). Accessed 23 February 2009.

37.

M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Department of Biostatistics. Biostatistics and clinical trial computer programs. (Available at: http://biostatistics.mdanderson.org/SoftwareDownload/ ). Accessed 23 February 2009.

38.

McCarthy A. Is it time to change the design of clinical trials? Cure Magazine, Summer, 2006. (Available at: http://www.curetoday.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/article.show/id/2/article_id/371). Accessed 26 February 2009.