Abstract
A common concern in Bayesian data analysis is that an inappropriately informative prior may unduly influence posterior inferences. In the context of Bayesian clinical trial design, well chosen priors are important to ensure that posterior-based decision rules have good frequentist properties. However, it is difficult to quantify prior information in all but the most stylized models. This issue may be addressed by quantifying the prior information in terms of a number of hypothetical patients, i.e., a prior effective sample size (ESS). Prior ESS provides a useful tool for understanding the impact of prior assumptions. For example, the prior ESS may be used to guide calibration of prior variances and other hyperprior parameters. In this paper, we discuss such prior sensitivity analyses by using a recently proposed method to compute a prior ESS. We apply this in several typical settings of Bayesian biomedical data analysis and clinical trial design. The data analyses include cross-tabulated counts, multiple correlated diagnostic tests, and ordinal outcomes using a proportional-odds model. The study designs include a phase I trial with late-onset toxicities, a phase II trial that monitors event times, and a phase I/II trial with dose-finding based on efficacy and toxicity.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Carlin JB (2002) Assessing the homogeneity of three odds ratios: A case study in small- sample inference. In: Gatsonis C, Robert EK, Carlin B, Carriquiry A, Gelman A, Verdinelli I, West M (eds) Case studies in Bayesian statistics, vol V. Springer, New York, pp 279–290
Cheung YK, Chappell R (2000) Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late-onset toxicities. Biometrics 56:1177–1182
Choi YK, Johnson WO, Collins MT, Gardner IA (2006) Bayesian inferences for receiver operating characteristic curves in the absence of a gold standard. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 11:210–229
Congdon P (2003) Applied Bayesian modelling. Wiley, Chichester
Elkind MS, Sacco RL, MacArthur RB, Fink DJ, Peerschke E, Andrews H, Neils G, Stillman J, Corporan T, Leifer D, Cheung K (2008) The neuroprotection with statin therapy for acute recovery trial (NeuSTART): An adaptive design phase i dose-escalation study of high-dose lovastatin in acute ischemic stroke. Int J Stroke 3:210–218
Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB (2004) Bayesian data analysis, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall/CRC, New York
Morita S, Thall PF, Müller P (2008) Determining the effective sample size of a parametric prior. Biometrics 64:595–602
Morita S, Thall PF, Müller P (2009) Prior effective sample size in conditionally independent hierarchical models. Technical Report, Yokohama City University
O’Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L (1990) Continual reassessment method: A practical design for phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 46:33–48
Thall PF, Cook JD (2004) Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics 60:684–693
Thall PF, Wooten LH, Tannir NM (2005) Monitoring event times in early phase clinical trials: Some practical issues. Clin Trials 2:467–478
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morita, S., Thall, P.F. & Müller, P. Evaluating the Impact of Prior Assumptions in Bayesian Biostatistics. Stat Biosci 2, 1–17 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12561-010-9018-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12561-010-9018-x