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.
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.
Authors: Aman U Buzdar; Nuhad K Ibrahim; Deborah Francis; Daniel J Booser; Eva S Thomas; Richard L Theriault; Lajos Pusztai; Marjorie C Green; Banu K Arun; Sharon H Giordano; Massimo Cristofanilli; Debra K Frye; Terry L Smith; Kelly K Hunt; Sonja E Singletary; Aysegul A Sahin; Michael S Ewer; Thomas A Buchholz; Donald Berry; Gabriel N Hortobagyi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-02-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Francis J Giles; Hagop M Kantarjian; Jorge E Cortes; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Srdan Verstovsek; Stefan Faderl; Deborah A Thomas; Alessandra Ferrajoli; Susan O'Brien; Jay K Wathen; Lian-Chun Xiao; Donald A Berry; Elihu H Estey Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Charles H Hennekens; Frank M Sacks; Andrew Tonkin; J Wouter Jukema; Robert P Byington; Bertram Pitt; Donald A Berry; Scott M Berry; Neville F Ford; Andrew J Walker; Kannan Natarajan; Chen Sheng-Lin; Frederick T Fiedorek; Rene Belder Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2004-01-12
Authors: Lorenzo Trippa; Eudocia Q Lee; Patrick Y Wen; Tracy T Batchelor; Timothy Cloughesy; Giovanni Parmigiani; Brian M Alexander Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-05-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Byron J Gajewski; Scott M Berry; Melanie Quintana; Mamatha Pasnoor; Mazen Dimachkie; Laura Herbelin; Richard Barohn Journal: Stat Med Date: 2015-01-07 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: William J Meurer; Roger J Lewis; Danilo Tagle; Michael D Fetters; Laurie Legocki; Scott Berry; Jason Connor; Valerie Durkalski; Jordan Elm; Wenle Zhao; Shirley Frederiksen; Robert Silbergleit; Yuko Palesch; Donald A Berry; William G Barsan Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 5.721