Summarizing historical information on controls in clinical trials - PubMed (original) (raw)
Summarizing historical information on controls in clinical trials
Beat Neuenschwander et al. Clin Trials. 2010 Feb.
Abstract
Background: Historical information is always relevant when designing clinical trials, but it might also be incorporated in the analysis. It seems appropriate to exploit past information on comparable control groups.
Purpose: Phase IV and proof-of-concept trials are used to discuss aspects of summarizing historical control data as prior information in a new trial. The importance of a fair assessment of the similarity of control parameters is emphasized.
Methods: The methodology is meta-analytic-predictive. Heterogeneity of control parameters is expressed via the between-trial variation, which is the key parameter determining the prior effective sample size and its upper bound (prior maximum sample size).
Results: For a Phase IV trial (930 control patients in 11 historical trials) between-trial heterogeneity was fairly small, resulting in a prior effective sample size of approximately 90 patients. For a proof-of-concept trial (363 patients in four historical trials) heterogeneity was moderate to substantial, resulting in a prior effective sample size of approximately 20. For another proof-of-concept trial (14 patients in one historical trial), assuming substantial heterogeneity implied a prior effective sample size of 7. The prior effective sample size can only be large if the amount of historical data is large and between-trial heterogeneity is small. The prior effective sample size is bounded by the prior maximum sample size (ratio of within- to between-trial variance), irrespective of the amount of historical data.
Limitations: The meta-analytic-predictive approach assumes exchangeability of control parameters across trials. Due to the difficulty to quantify between-trial variability, sensitivity of conclusions regarding assumptions and type of inference should be assessed.
Conclusions: The use of historical control information is a valuable option and may lead to more efficient clinical trials. The proposed approach is attractive for nonconfirmatory trials, but under certain circumstances extensions to the confirmatory setting could be envisaged as well.
Similar articles
- Using historical control information for the design and analysis of clinical trials with overdispersed count data.
Gsteiger S, Neuenschwander B, Mercier F, Schmidli H. Gsteiger S, et al. Stat Med. 2013 Sep 20;32(21):3609-22. doi: 10.1002/sim.5851. Epub 2013 May 31. Stat Med. 2013. PMID: 23722585 - Bayesian semiparametric meta-analytic-predictive prior for historical control borrowing in clinical trials.
Hupf B, Bunn V, Lin J, Dong C. Hupf B, et al. Stat Med. 2021 Jun 30;40(14):3385-3399. doi: 10.1002/sim.8970. Epub 2021 Apr 13. Stat Med. 2021. PMID: 33851441 - Robust meta-analytic-predictive priors in clinical trials with historical control information.
Schmidli H, Gsteiger S, Roychoudhury S, O'Hagan A, Spiegelhalter D, Neuenschwander B. Schmidli H, et al. Biometrics. 2014 Dec;70(4):1023-32. doi: 10.1111/biom.12242. Epub 2014 Oct 29. Biometrics. 2014. PMID: 25355546 - Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, Moraleda C, Rogers L, Daniels K, Green P. Crider K, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article. - Incorporation of historical data in the analysis of randomized therapeutic trials.
Rietbergen C, Klugkist I, Janssen KJ, Moons KG, Hoijtink HJ. Rietbergen C, et al. Contemp Clin Trials. 2011 Nov;32(6):848-55. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2011.06.002. Epub 2011 Jun 25. Contemp Clin Trials. 2011. PMID: 21729767 Review.
Cited by
- Detecting and accounting for violations of the constancy assumption in non-inferiority clinical trials.
Koopmeiners JS, Hobbs BP. Koopmeiners JS, et al. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 May;27(5):1547-1558. doi: 10.1177/0962280216665418. Epub 2016 Sep 1. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018. PMID: 27587591 Free PMC article. - Historical control data for the interpretation of ecotoxicity data: are we missing a trick?
Brooks AC, Foudoulakis M, Schuster HS, Wheeler JR. Brooks AC, et al. Ecotoxicology. 2019 Dec;28(10):1198-1209. doi: 10.1007/s10646-019-02128-9. Epub 2019 Nov 6. Ecotoxicology. 2019. PMID: 31696445 Free PMC article. Review. - Equal access to innovative therapies and precision cancer care.
Buzyn A, Blay JY, Hoog-Labouret N, Jimenez M, Nowak F, Deley MC, Pérol D, Cailliot C, Raynaud J, Vassal G. Buzyn A, et al. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016 Jun;13(6):385-93. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.31. Epub 2016 Mar 22. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016. PMID: 27000960 Review. - Incorporating external controls in the design of randomized clinical trials: a case study in solid tumors.
Damone EM, Zhu J, Pang H, Li X, Zhao Y, Kwiatkowski E, Carey LA, Ibrahim JG. Damone EM, et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Nov 1;24(1):264. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02383-3. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024. PMID: 39487399 Free PMC article. - A Similarity-Weighted Informative Prior Distribution for Bayesian Multiple Regression Models.
König C. König C. Front Psychol. 2021 May 11;12:614236. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.614236. eCollection 2021. Front Psychol. 2021. PMID: 34054640 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous