ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2025
Incorporating historic information to further improve power when conducting Bayesian information borrowing in basket trials.
Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In basket trials a single therapeutic treatment is tested on several patient populations simultaneously, each of which forming a basket, where patients across all baskets on the trial share a common genetic aberration. These trials allow testing of treatments on small groups of patients, however, limited basket sample sizes can result in inadequate precision and power of estimates. It is well known that Bayesian information borrowing models such as the exchangeability-nonexchangeability (EXNEX) model can be implemented to tackle such a problem, drawing on information from one basket when making inference in another. An alternative approach to improve power of estimates, is to incorporate any historical or external information available. This paper considers models that amalgamate both forms of information borrowing, allowing borrowing between baskets in the ongoing trial whilst also drawing on response data from historical sources, with the aim to further improve treatment effect estimates. We propose several Bayesian information borrowing approaches that incorporate historical information into the model. These methods are data-driven, updating the degree of borrowing based on the level of homogeneity between information sources. A thorough simulation study is presented to draw comparisons between the proposed approaches, whilst also comparing to the standard EXNEX model in which no historical information is utilized. The models are also applied to a real-life trial example to demonstrate their performance in practice. We show that the incorporation of historic data under the novel approaches can lead to a substantial improvement in precision and power of treatment effect estimates when such data is homogeneous to the responses in the ongoing trial. Under some approaches, this came alongside an inflation in type I error rate in cases of heterogeneity. However, the use of a power prior in the EXNEX model is shown to increase power and precision, whilst maintaining similar error rates to the standard EXNEX model.
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.