Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Methodology

Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study

Authors: Elizabeth G. Ryan, Sarah E. Lamb, Esther Williamson, Simon Gates

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Bayesian 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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

We 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.

Conclusions

Using 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 registration

CAST study registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN37807450. Retrospectively registered on 25 April 2003.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Arrowsmith J. Trial watch: phase III and submission failures: 2007–2010. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011;10(2):87.CrossRef Arrowsmith J. Trial watch: phase III and submission failures: 2007–2010. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011;10(2):87.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Dimairo M, Coates E, Pallmann P, Todd S, Julious SA, Jaki T, et al. Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design. BMC Med. 2018;16:210.CrossRef Dimairo M, Coates E, Pallmann P, Todd S, Julious SA, Jaki T, et al. Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design. BMC Med. 2018;16:210.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Trippa L, Lee EQ, Wen PY, Batchelor TT, Cloughesy T, Parmigiani G, et al. Bayesian adaptive randomized trial design for patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3258–63.CrossRef Trippa L, Lee EQ, Wen PY, Batchelor TT, Cloughesy T, Parmigiani G, et al. Bayesian adaptive randomized trial design for patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3258–63.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Connor JT, Luce BR, Broglio KR, Ishak KJ, Mullins CD, Vanness DJ, et al. Do Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages for comparative effectiveness research? Protocol for the RE-ADAPT study. Clin Trials. 2013;10(5):807–27.CrossRef Connor JT, Luce BR, Broglio KR, Ishak KJ, Mullins CD, Vanness DJ, et al. Do Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages for comparative effectiveness research? Protocol for the RE-ADAPT study. Clin Trials. 2013;10(5):807–27.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Wason JMS, Trippa L. A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi-stage designs for multi-arm clinical trials. Stat Med. 2014;33:2206–21.CrossRef Wason JMS, Trippa L. A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi-stage designs for multi-arm clinical trials. Stat Med. 2014;33:2206–21.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Korn EL, Freidlin B. Outcome-adaptive randomization: is it useful? J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:771–6.CrossRef Korn EL, Freidlin B. Outcome-adaptive randomization: is it useful? J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:771–6.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Thall P, Fox P, Wathen J. Statistical controversies in clinical research: scientific and ethical problems with adaptive randomization in comparative clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:1621–8.CrossRef Thall P, Fox P, Wathen J. Statistical controversies in clinical research: scientific and ethical problems with adaptive randomization in comparative clinical trials. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:1621–8.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Wason JMS, Magirr D, Law M, Jaki T. Some recommendations for multi-arm multi-stage trials. Stat Meth Med Res. 2016;25:716–27.CrossRef Wason JMS, Magirr D, Law M, Jaki T. Some recommendations for multi-arm multi-stage trials. Stat Meth Med Res. 2016;25:716–27.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Perkins GD, Ji C, Deakin CD, Quinn T, Nolan JP, Scomparin C, et al. A randomized trial of epinephrine in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:711–21.CrossRef Perkins GD, Ji C, Deakin CD, Quinn T, Nolan JP, Scomparin C, et al. A randomized trial of epinephrine in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:711–21.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Combes A, Hajage D, Capellier G, Demoule A, Lavoue S, Guervilly C, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(21):1965–75.CrossRef Combes A, Hajage D, Capellier G, Demoule A, Lavoue S, Guervilly C, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(21):1965–75.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Shah PL, Slebos D-J, Cardoso PFG, Cetti E, Voelker K, Levine B, et al. Bronchoscopic lung-volume reduction with Exhale airway stents for emphysema (EASE trial): randomized, sham-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;378:997–1005.CrossRef Shah PL, Slebos D-J, Cardoso PFG, Cetti E, Voelker K, Levine B, et al. Bronchoscopic lung-volume reduction with Exhale airway stents for emphysema (EASE trial): randomized, sham-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;378:997–1005.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Reardon MJ, Van Mieghem NM, Popma JJ, Kleiman NS, Søndergaard L, Mumtaz M, et al. Aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(14):1321–31.CrossRef Reardon MJ, Van Mieghem NM, Popma JJ, Kleiman NS, Søndergaard L, Mumtaz M, et al. Aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(14):1321–31.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Nogueira RG, Jadhav AP, Haussen DC, Bonafe A, Budzik RF, Bhuva P, et al. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:11–21.CrossRef Nogueira RG, Jadhav AP, Haussen DC, Bonafe A, Budzik RF, Bhuva P, et al. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:11–21.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Lamb SE, Nakash RA, Withers EJ, Clark M, Marsh JL, Wilson S, et al. Clinical and cost effectiveness of mechanical support for severe ankle sprains: design of a randomised controlled trial in the emergency department. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005;6:1.CrossRef Lamb SE, Nakash RA, Withers EJ, Clark M, Marsh JL, Wilson S, et al. Clinical and cost effectiveness of mechanical support for severe ankle sprains: design of a randomised controlled trial in the emergency department. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005;6:1.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Cooke MW, Marsh JL, Clark M, Nakash R, Jarvis RM, Hutton JL, et al. Treatment of severe ankle sprain: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three types of mechanical ankle support with tubular bandage. The CAST trial. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13(13). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta13130. Cooke MW, Marsh JL, Clark M, Nakash R, Jarvis RM, Hutton JL, et al. Treatment of severe ankle sprain: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three types of mechanical ankle support with tubular bandage. The CAST trial. Health Technol Assess. 2009;13(13). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3310/​hta13130.
17.
go back to reference Lamb SE, Marsh JL, Hutton JL, Nakash R, Cooke MW, Collaborative Ankle Support Trial (CAST Group). Mechanical supports for acute, severe ankle sprain: a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9663):575–81.CrossRef Lamb SE, Marsh JL, Hutton JL, Nakash R, Cooke MW, Collaborative Ankle Support Trial (CAST Group). Mechanical supports for acute, severe ankle sprain: a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9663):575–81.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Roos E, Brandsson S, Karlsson J. Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22:788–94.CrossRef Roos E, Brandsson S, Karlsson J. Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22:788–94.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Connor JT, Elm JJ, Broglio KR, ESETT and ADAPT-IT Investigators. Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages in comparative effectiveness trials: an example in status epilepticus. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:S130–7.CrossRef Connor JT, Elm JJ, Broglio KR, ESETT and ADAPT-IT Investigators. Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages in comparative effectiveness trials: an example in status epilepticus. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:S130–7.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Wason JMS, Brocklehurst P, Yap C. When to keep it simple — adaptive designs are not always useful. BMC Med. 2019;17:152.CrossRef Wason JMS, Brocklehurst P, Yap C. When to keep it simple — adaptive designs are not always useful. BMC Med. 2019;17:152.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Thall PF, Wathen JK. Practical Bayesian adaptive randomisation in clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(5):859–66.CrossRef Thall PF, Wathen JK. Practical Bayesian adaptive randomisation in clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(5):859–66.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Wathen JK, Thall PF. A simulation study of outcome adaptive randomization in multi-arm clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2017;14(5):432–40.CrossRef Wathen JK, Thall PF. A simulation study of outcome adaptive randomization in multi-arm clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2017;14(5):432–40.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Dunnett C. A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J Amer Stat Assoc. 1955;50:1096–121.CrossRef Dunnett C. A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J Amer Stat Assoc. 1955;50:1096–121.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Plummer M. JAGS: a program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Distributed Statistical Computing (DSC 2003); 2003. p. 20–2. Plummer M. JAGS: a program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Distributed Statistical Computing (DSC 2003); 2003. p. 20–2.
27.
go back to reference Luce BR, Connor JT, Broglio KR, Mullins CD, Ishak KJ, Saunders E, et al. Using Bayesian adaptive trial designs for comparative effectiveness research: a virtual trial execution. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165:431–8.CrossRef Luce BR, Connor JT, Broglio KR, Mullins CD, Ishak KJ, Saunders E, et al. Using Bayesian adaptive trial designs for comparative effectiveness research: a virtual trial execution. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165:431–8.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Korn EL, Freidlin B. Adaptive clinical trials: advantages and disadvantages of various adaptive design elements. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017;109(6):djx013.CrossRef Korn EL, Freidlin B. Adaptive clinical trials: advantages and disadvantages of various adaptive design elements. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017;109(6):djx013.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Jiang Y, Zhao W, Durkalski-Mauldin V. Impact of adaptation algorithm, timing, and stopping boundaries on the performance of Bayesian response adaptive randomization in confirmative trials with a binary endpoint. Contemp Clin Trials. 2017;62:114–20.CrossRef Jiang Y, Zhao W, Durkalski-Mauldin V. Impact of adaptation algorithm, timing, and stopping boundaries on the performance of Bayesian response adaptive randomization in confirmative trials with a binary endpoint. Contemp Clin Trials. 2017;62:114–20.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Gallo P. Operational challenges in adaptive design implementation. Pharm Stat. 2006;5(2):119–24.CrossRef Gallo P. Operational challenges in adaptive design implementation. Pharm Stat. 2006;5(2):119–24.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Berry DA. Adaptive clinical trials: the promise and the caution. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(6):606–9.CrossRef Berry DA. Adaptive clinical trials: the promise and the caution. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(6):606–9.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Villar SS, Bowden J, Wason J. Response-adaptive designs for binary responses: how to offer patient benefit while being robust to time trends? Pharm Stat. 2018;17(2):182–97.CrossRef Villar SS, Bowden J, Wason J. Response-adaptive designs for binary responses: how to offer patient benefit while being robust to time trends? Pharm Stat. 2018;17(2):182–97.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Bayesian adaptive designs for multi-arm trials: an orthopaedic case study
Authors
Elizabeth G. Ryan
Sarah E. Lamb
Esther Williamson
Simon Gates
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-4021-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Trials 1/2020 Go to the issue