ReviewJCO precision oncology2022
Comparative Study of Bayesian Information Borrowing Methods in Oncology Clinical Trials.
Review in JCO precision oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigational Use of Real-World Data as a Hybrid Control in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma From the Randomized Phase Ib/II MORPHEUS Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Trial
- Statistical Guardrails for Hybrid-Controlled Trials: Robust to Confounding and Between-Study Heterogeneity.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- The design of a small Bayesian hybrid-controlled trial utilizing time-to-event data from six published sources that used best alternative care to treat liver-predominant metastasis from primary ocular melanoma.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
- New clinical trial design borrowing information across patient subgroups based on fusion-penalized regression models.Statistical methods in medical research · 2024Article
- Bayesian statistics for clinical research.Lancet (London, England) · 2024Review
- Bayesian approach for design and analysis of medical device trials in the era of modern clinical studies.Medical review (2021) · 2023Article
- Optimizing dose-schedule regimens with bayesian adaptive designs: opportunities and challenges.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- [Progress and Application of Bayesian Approach in the Early Research and Development of New Anticancer Drugs].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWith deeper insight into precision medicine, more innovative oncology trial designs have been proposed to contribute to the characteristics of novel antitumor drugs. Bayesian information borrowing is an indispensable part of these designs, which shows great advantages in improving the efficiency of clinical trials. Bayesian methods provide an effective framework when incorporating information. However, the key point lies in how to choose an appropriate method for complex oncology clinical trials.
methodsWe divided the borrowing information scenarios into concurrent and nonconcurrent scenarios according to whether the data to be borrowed are observed at the same time as in the current trial or not. Then, we provided an overview of the methods in each scenario. Performance comparison of different methods is carried out with regard to the type I error and power.
resultsAs demonstrated by the simulation results in each borrowing scenario, the Bayesian hierarchical model and its extensions are more appropriate for concurrent borrowing. The simulation results demonstrate that the Bayesian hierarchical model shows great advantages when the arms are homogeneous. However, such a method should be adopted with caution when heterogeneity exists. We recommend the other methods, considering heterogeneity. Borrow information from informative priors is more suggested for nonconcurrent borrowing scenarios. Multisource exchangeability models are more suitable for multiple historical trials, while meta-analytic-predictive prior should be carefully applied.
conclusionBayesian information borrowing is useful and can improve the efficiency of clinical trial designs. However, we should carefully choose an appropriate information borrowing method when facing a practical innovative oncology trial, as an appropriate method is essential to provide ideal design performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.