Bayesian basket trial design with false-discovery rate control

Emily C Zabor1, Michael J Kane2, Satrajit Roychoudhury3

  • 1Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Abstract

Insights

Tumor-agnostic therapies use molecular targets, advancing oncology beyond traditional classification. This study introduces a multisource exchangeability model for phase II basket trials, improving power with false-discovery rate control, especially for small sample sizes.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Biostatistics
  • Clinical Trial Design

Background:

  • Tumor-agnostic therapies target molecular alterations, transcending traditional cancer histology.
  • Master protocol designs, like basket trials, are crucial for developing targeted therapies across diverse cancer types.
  • Basket trials present complex design challenges, including managing multiple testing, necessitating guidance for investigators.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To explore the sensitivity of the multisource exchangeability model to prior specifications under varying response heterogeneity.
  • To present a multisource exchangeability model design incorporating false-discovery rate (FDR) control for phase II basket trials.
  • To compare the operating characteristics of FDR control versus family-wise error rate (FWER) control and frequentist independent basket analysis.

Main Methods:

  • Simulations were conducted using a multisource exchangeability model, assessing prior probability of exchangeability.
  • A novel design incorporating FDR control was developed and compared to FWER control and independent analysis.
  • Simulations were based on the SUMMIT trial design for Neratinib in solid tumors, focusing on single-arm phase II trials with binary outcomes.

Main Results:

  • Prior probabilities of exchangeability between 0.1 and 0.3 offered optimal precision-bias trade-offs, particularly for baskets with <30 samples.
  • Re-analysis of the SUMMIT trial demonstrated the breast cancer basket exceeded null response rates (posterior probability 0.999) with low exchangeability to other baskets.
  • FDR control significantly improved power in small-sample baskets compared to FWER control (e.g., 0.76 vs. 0.56 power for a single active basket with n=25).

Conclusions:

  • Calibrated prior exchangeability probabilities and FDR control enhance multisource exchangeability model designs for phase II basket trials.
  • These methods provide high power to detect promising treatments, even with small sample sizes in individual baskets.
  • The findings offer crucial guidance for optimizing complex basket trial designs in precision oncology.

Related Concept Videos

Testing a Claim about Population Proportion01:24

Testing a Claim about Population Proportion

A complete procedure for testing a claim about a population proportion is provided here.
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...
3.5K
Binomial Probability Distribution01:15

Binomial Probability Distribution

A binomial distribution is a probability distribution for a procedure with a fixed number of trials, where each trial can have only two outcomes.
The outcomes of a binomial experiment fit a binomial probability distribution. A statistical experiment can be classified as a binomial experiment if the following conditions are met:
There are a fixed number of trials. Think of trials as repetitions of an experiment. The letter n denotes the number of trials.
There are only two possible outcomes,...
12.4K
Bonferroni Test01:10

Bonferroni Test

The Bonferroni test is a statistical test named after Carlo Emilio Bonferroni, an Italian mathematician best known for Bonferroni inequalities. This statistical test is a type of multiple comparison test to determine which means are different than the rest. Bonferroni test can minimize the Type 1 error by reducing the significance level alpha, which otherwise increases with sample pairs.
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
2.9K
Expected Frequencies in Goodness-of-Fit Tests01:19

Expected Frequencies in Goodness-of-Fit Tests

A goodness-of-fit test is conducted to determine whether the observed frequency values are statistically similar to the frequencies expected for the dataset. Suppose the expected frequencies for a dataset are equal such as when predicting the frequency of any number appearing when casting a die. In that case, the expected frequency is the ratio of the total number of observations (n)  to the number of categories (k).
3.2K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
366