ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Perspectives on the Use of a Bayesian Approach in Designing Seamless Phase 2/3 Clinical Trials with Dose Selection, Early Stopping for Futility and Efficacy, or Sample Size Re-estimation.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Seamless Phase 2/3 clinical trial designs have become an increasingly attractive strategy to improve development efficiency by reducing the time between development phases and enabling the reuse of early-stage data in confirmatory analyses. In parallel, Bayesian methods have gained attention for their ability to support adaptive decision-making under uncertainty, particularly in complex trial designs. In this article, we discuss perspectives on the use of Bayesian approach in designing inferentially seamless Phase 2/3 trials that incorporate dose selection, early stopping for futility or efficacy, and sample size re-estimation. We outline key advantages and limitations of seamless approaches compared with separate Phase 2 and Phase 3 trials, and we contrast Bayesian and frequentist frameworks, including hybrid designs that combine Bayesian interim decision rules with frequentist final inference. Particular emphasis is placed on operating characteristics that are informative for trial planning and regulatory discussions, such as predictive probabilities of success, probabilities of false and correct conclusions, dose selection probabilities, and expected sample size. We propose an iterative design process that integrates prior internal and external evidence, multidisciplinary stakeholder input, and extensive simulation to calibrate decision rules. A detailed case study of an inferentially seamless Phase 2/3 trial illustrates how Bayesian posterior and predictive probabilities can guide interim decisions on dose selection, futility stopping, and adaptive sample size modification, while maintaining strong control of the family-wise error rate at the final analysis. We conclude that the use of Bayesian methods in designing seamless Phase 2/3 designs, when carefully planned and transparently evaluated through simulations, can provide a flexible and efficient framework for accelerating drug development while supporting robust and interpretable decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42842125What 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.