ArticleBMC medical research methodology2025
A bayesian dynamic borrowing framework for improving the efficiency of clinical trials.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo develop a Bayesian method for dynamic borrowing of information from historical clinical trials and real-world data that has the potential to improve the efficiency of clinical trials.
methodsWe propose a novel statistical metric to quantify heterogeneity among data sources. Based on this metric, a Multi-Source Dynamic Borrowing (MSDB) Bayesian prior framework was proposed, which can address baseline imbalance and dynamically discount information from each data source separately without assuming exchangeability. In a simulation study, we compared the proposed framework and metrics with historical methods.
resultsWe evaluated performance by comparing power, type I error, bias, and mean squared error (MSE) across methods. Our approach outperformed existing methods by enhancing power and reducing MSE, while effectively controlling type I error and bias in the presence of heterogeneity and baseline imbalances. Moreover, an application involving isatuximab in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma further validated the performance of the MSDB prior.
conclusionThe MSDB prior method dynamically adjusts borrowing information, allowing for a more robust and accurate incorporation of historical data. Its flexible framework allows it to play a crucial role in various applications, thereby accelerating drug development and supporting regulatory decision making.
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.