Literature DB >> 9192445

Bayesian design and analysis of two x two factorial clinical trials.

R Simon1, L S Freedman.   

Abstract

The 2 x 2 factorial design has been advocated for improving the efficiency of clinical trials. Most such trials are designed on the assumption that there is no interaction between the levels of the factors and outcome. This assumption is often problematic, however, because interactions are usually possible in clinical trials and the sample sizes often used provide little power in testing for interactions. We consider the use of Bayesian methods for the design and analysis of 2 x 2 factorial clinical trials. This approach avoids the need to dichotomize one's assumptions that interactions either do or do not exist and provides a flexible approach to the design and analysis of such clinical trials. Exact results are developed for balanced factorial designs with normal response. Approximations are then presented for factorial designs based on the logistic model for binary response or the proportional hazards model for time-to-event data. The resulting approximate posterior distributions are normal and hence no extensive computations are required. Suggestions for specification of prior distributions are presented.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9192445

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  11 in total

Review 1.  Two-by-Two Factorial Cancer Treatment Trials: Is Sufficient Attention Being Paid to Possible Interactions?

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Edward L Korn
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Benefits of varenicline vs. bupropion for smoking cessation: a Bayesian analysis of the interaction of reward sensitivity and treatment.

Authors:  Paul M Cinciripini; Charles E Green; Jason D Robinson; Maher Karam-Hage; Jeffrey M Engelmann; Jennifer A Minnix; David W Wetter; Francesco Versace
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 3.  Strategies for clinical trials in type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Mario R Ehlers
Journal:  J Autoimmun       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 7.094

4.  Evaluation of heterogeneity in pharmacotherapy trials for drug dependence: a Bayesian approach.

Authors:  C E Green; F G Moeller; J M Schmitz; J F Lucke; S D Lane; A C Swann; R E Lasky; J P Carbonari
Journal:  Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.829

5.  Sample size requirements for separating out the effects of combination treatments: randomised controlled trials of combination therapy vs. standard treatment compared to factorial designs for patients with tuberculous meningitis.

Authors:  Marcel Wolbers; Dorothee Heemskerk; Tran Thi Hong Chau; Nguyen Thi Bich Yen; Maxine Caws; Jeremy Farrar; Jeremy Day
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  Economic evaluation of factorial randomised controlled trials: challenges, methods and recommendations.

Authors:  Helen Dakin; Alastair Gray
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-05-03       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Partial factorial trials: comparing methods for statistical analysis and economic evaluation.

Authors:  Helen A Dakin; Alastair M Gray; Graeme S MacLennan; Richard W Morris; David W Murray
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-08-16       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Overcoming challenges in designing and implementing a phase II randomized controlled trial using a presurgical model to test a dietary intervention in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Stephen L George; Boyd R Switzer; Denise C Snyder; John F Madden; Thomas J Polascik; Mack T Ruffin; Robin T Vollmer
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.486

9.  The influence of baseline marijuana use on treatment of cocaine dependence: application of an informative-priors bayesian approach.

Authors:  Charles Green; Joy Schmitz; Jan Lindsay; Claudia Pedroza; Scott Lane; Rob Agnelli; Kimberley Kjome; F Gerard Moeller
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2012-10-30       Impact factor: 4.157

10.  Advantages of Bayesian monitoring methods in deciding whether and when to stop a clinical trial: an example of a neonatal cooling trial.

Authors:  Claudia Pedroza; Jon E Tyson; Abhik Das; Abbot Laptook; Edward F Bell; Seetha Shankaran
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-07-22       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.