Similarities and Differences of Bayesian Designs and Adaptive Designs for Medical Devices: A Regulatory View

Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 356-368

  Campbell, Gregory ^a  

^a CENTER FOR DEVICES AND RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical trial simulation; Operational bias; Predictive modeling; Prior information; Sample size reestimation; Treatment response adaptive design

Indexed keywords

WARFARIN;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG MARKETING; DRUG SCREENING; ELECTROSTIMULATION; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEART ATRIUM FIBRILLATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL DEVICE; MEDICAL STAFF; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PROBABILITY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SAMPLE SIZE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; STATISTICS; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

EID: 84889662412     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19466315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19466315.2013.846873     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Alderson, N. E., Campbell, G., D'Agostino, R., Ellenberg, S., Lindborg, S., O'Neill, R., Rubin, D. and Siegel, J. 2005. Statistical Issues: A Roundtable Discussion. Clinical Trials, 2: 364 - 372.
2. Bauer, P. and Koenig, F. 2006. The Reassessment of Trial Perspectives From Interim Data-A Critical View. Statistics in Medicine, 25: 23 - 36.
3. Berry, S. M., Carlin, B. P., Lee, J. J. and Muller, P. 2010. Bayesian Adaptive Methods for Clinical Trials, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
4. Campbell, G. 2005. The Experience in the Center for Devices and Radiological Health With Bayesian Strategies. Clinical Trials, 2: 359 - 363.
5. Campbell, G. 2011. Bayesian Statistics in Medical Devices: Innovation Sparked by FDA. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 21: 871 - 887.
6. Chen, Y. H. J., DeMets, D. L. and Lan, K. K. G. 2004. Increasing the Sample Size When the Unblinded Interim Result is Promising. Statistics in Medicine, 23: 1023 - 1038.
7. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. 2007. Reflection Paper on Methodological Issues in Confirmatory Clinical Trials Planned With an Adaptive Design. (issued October, 2007). Available at http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003616.pdf
8. Cui, L., Hung, H. M. J. and Wang, S. J. 1999. Modification of Sample Size in Group Sequential Clinical Trials. Biometrics, 55: 321 - 324.
9. Denne, J. S. 2001. Sample Size Recalculation Using Conditional Power. Statistics in Medicine, 20: 2645 - 2660.
10. Detry, M. A., Lewis, R. J., Broglio, K. R., Connor, J. T., Berry, S. M. and Berry, D. A. 2012. Standards for the Design, Conduct, and Evaluation of Adaptive Randomized Clinical Trials. available at http://www.pcori.org/assets/Standards-for-the-Design-Conduct-and-Evaluation-of-Adaptive-Randomized-Clinical-Trials.pdf (accessed November 14, 2012)
11. DuMouchel, W. 1999. Bayesian Data Mining in Large Frequency Tables, With an Application to the FDA Spontaneous Reporting System. The American Statistician, 53: 177 - 190.
12. Food and Drug Administration. 2010a. Guidance for the Use of Bayesian Statistics in Medical Device Clinical Trials. (issued February 5, 2010), available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm071072.htm (accessed November 14, 2012)
13. Food and Drug Administration. 2010b. Draft Guidance on Adaptive Design Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biologics. (released February, 2010), available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/ucm201790.pdf (accessed November 14, 2012)
14. Food and Drug Administration. 2011. Draft Guidance for Industry, Clinical Investigators, and Food and Drug Administration Staff - Design Considerations for Pivotal Clinical Investigations for Medical Devices. (issued August 15, 2011),available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm265553.htm
15. Food and Drug Administration. 2012. Factors to Consider When Making Benefit-Risk Determinations in Medical Device Premarket Approvals and De Novo Classifications. (issued March 28, 2012), available at http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm267829.htm (accessed November 14, 2012)
16. Gamalo, M. A., Wu, R. and Tiwari, R. C. 2011. Bayesian Approach to Non-Inferiority Trials for Proportions. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 2: 902 - 919.
17. Gamalo, M. A., Wu, R. and Tiwari, R. C. in press. Bayesian Approach to Non-Inferiority Trials for Normal Means. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, DOI: 10.1177/0962280212448723.
18. Gaydos, B., Anderson, K. M., Berry, D., Burnham, N., Chuang-Stein, C., Dudinak, J., Fardipour, P., Gallo, P., Givens, S., Lewis, R., Maca, J., Pinheiro, J., Pritchett, Y. and Krams, M. 2009. Good Practices for Adaptive Clinical Trials in Pharmaceutical Product Development. Drug Information Journal, 43: 539 - 556.
19. Goodman, S. N. 1992. A Comment on Replication, p-Values and Evidence. Statistics in Medicine, 11: 875 - 879.
20. Grieve, A. P. and Krams, M. 2005. "ASTIN: A Bayesian Adaptive Dose-Response Trial in Acute Stroke" (with discussion). Clinical Trials, 2: 340 - 378.
21. Holmes, D. R. Reddy, V. Y.,. 2009. Percutaneous Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage versus Warfarin Therapy for Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomised Non-Inferiority Trial. Lancet, 374: 534 - 542.
22. Hu, F. and Rosenberger, W. 2006. The Theory of Response-Adaptive Randomization in Clinical Trials, New York: Wiley.
23. Hung, H. M. J., O'Neill, R., Wang, S-J. and Lawrence, J. 2006. A Regulatory View on Adaptive/Flexible Clinical Trial Design. Biometrical Journal, 48: 565 - 573.
24. Hung, H. M. J., Wang, S-J. and O'Neill, R. 2011. Flexible Design Clinical Trial Methodology in Regulatory Applications. Statistics in Medicine, 30: 1519 - 1527.
25. Kadane, J. B. 1995. Prime Time for Bayes. Controlled Clinical Trials, 16: 313 - 318.
26. Krams, M.,. 2003. Acute Stroke Therapy by Inhibition of Neutrophils (ASTIN): An Adaptive Dose-Response Study of UK-279,276 in Acute Ischemic Stroke. Stroke, 34: 2543 - 2548.
27. Lehmacher, W. and Wassmer, G. 1999. Adaptive Sample Size Calculations in Group Sequential Trials. Biometrics, 55: 1286 - 1290.
28. Li, G., Shih, W. J., Xie, T. and Lu, J. 2002. A Sample Size Adjustment Procedure for Clinical Trials Based on Conditional Power. Biostatistics, 3: 277 - 287.
29. Lipscomb, B., Ma, G. and Berry, D. A. 2005. Bayesian Predictions of Final Outcomes: Regulatory Approval of a Spinal Implant. Clinical Trials, 2: 325 - 333.
30. McGrayne, S. B. 2011. The Theory That Would Not Die, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
31. Meurer, W. J., Lewis, R. J. and Berry, D. A. 2012. Adaptive Clinical Trials: A Partial Remedy for the Therapeutic Misconception?. JAMA: The Journal of The American Medical Association, 307: 2377 - 2378.
32. Meurer, W. J., Lewis, R. J., Fetters, M. D., Legocki, L., Berry, S., Durkalski, V., Elm, J., Zhao, W., Frederiksen, S., Silbergleit, R., Palesch, Y., Berry, D. A. and Barsan, W. G. 2012. An Overview of the Adaptive Designs Accelerating Promising Trials into Treatments (ADAPT-IT) Project. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 60: 451 - 457.
33. Mueller, H.-H. and Schaefer, H. 2001. Adaptive Group Sequential Designs for Clinical Trials: Combining the Advantages of Adaptive and of Classical Group Sequential Approaches. Biometrics, 57: 886 - 891.
34. National Research Council. 2010. The Prevention and Treatment of Missing Data in Clinical Trials (Panel on Handling Missing Data in Clinical Trials. Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education), Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
35. O'Neill, R. T. 1993. Some FDA Perspectives on Data Monitoring in Clinical Trials in Drug Development. Statistics in Medicine, 12: 601 - 608.
36. O'Neill, R. T. 1997. Secondary Endpoints Cannot be Validly Analyzed if the Primary Endpoint Does not Demonstrate Clear Statistical Significance. Controlled Clinical Trials, 18: 550 - 556.
37. O'Neill, R. T. 2006. FDA's Critical Path Initiative: A Perspective on Contributions of Biostatistics. Biometrical Journal, 4: 559 - 564.
38. O'Neill, R. T. and Szarfman, A. 1999. Discussion of Bayesian Data Mining in Large Frequency Tables, With an Application to the FDA Spontaneous Reporting System. The American Statistician, 53: 190 - 196.
39. Proschan, M. A. and Hunsberger, S. A. 1995. Designed Extension of Studies Based on Conditional Power. Biometrics, 51: 1315 - 1324.
40. Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., Moher, D. and for the CONSORT Group. 2010. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials. BMJ, 340: 698 - 702.
41. Stone, G. W. Martin, J. L.,. 2009. Effect of Supersaturated Oxygen Delivery on Infarct Size After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions, 2: 366 - 375.
42. Tsiatis, A. A. and Mehta, C. 2003. On the Inefficiency of the Adaptive Design for Monitoring Clinical Trials. Biometrika, 90: 367 - 378.
43. Wang, S-J. and Bretz, F. 2010. From Adaptive Design to Modern Protocol Design for Drug Development: Part I. Editorial and Summary of Adaptive Designs Session at the Third FDA/DIA Statistics Forum. Drug Information Journal, 44: 325 - 331.
44. Ware, J. H. 1989. Investigating Therapies of Potentially Great Benefit: ECMO (with discussion). Statistical Science, 4: 298 - 340.
45. Wilber, D. J. Pappone, C. 2010. Comparison of Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy and Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation in Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of The American Medical Association, 303: 333 - 340.
46. Wittes, J. and Brittain, E. 1990. The Role of Internal Pilot Studies in Increasing the Efficiency of Clinical Trials. Statistics in Medicine, 9: 65 - 72.