Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 4, 2025

The Use of Reverse Phase Protein Arrays RPPA to Explore Protein Expression Variation within Individual Renal Cell Cancers
Published on: January 22, 2013
Bayesian basket trial design with false-discovery rate control
Emily C Zabor1, Michael J Kane2, Satrajit Roychoudhury3
1Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Background:
Recent advances in developing "tumor agnostic" oncology therapies have identified molecular targets that define patient subpopulations in a manner that supersedes conventional criteria for cancer classification. These successes have produced effective targeted therapies that are administered to patients regardless of their tumor histology. Trials have evolved as well with master protocol designs. By blending translational and clinical science, basket trials in particular are well-suited to investigate and develop targeted therapies among multiple cancer histologies. However, basket trials intrinsically involve more complex design decisions, including issues of multiple testing across baskets, and guidance for investigators is needed.
Methods:
The sensitivity of the multisource exchangeability model to prior specification under differing degrees of response heterogeneity is explored through simulation. Then, a multisource exchangeability model design that incorporates control of the false-discovery rate is presented and a simulation study compares the operating characteristics to a design where the family-wise error rate is controlled and to the frequentist approach of treating the baskets as independent. Simulations are based on the original design of a real-world clinical trial, the SUMMIT trial, which investigated Neratinib treatment for a variety of solid tumors. The methods studied here are specific to single-arm phase II trials with binary outcomes.
Results:
Values of prior probability of exchangeability in the multisource exchangeability model between 0.1 and 0.3 provide the best trade-offs between gain in precision and bias, especially when per-basket sample size is below 30. Application of these calibration results to a re-analysis of the SUMMIT trial showed that the breast basket exceeded the null response rate with posterior probability of 0.999 while having low posterior probability of exchangeability with all other baskets. Simulations based on the design of the SUMMIT trial revealed that there is meaningful improvement in power even in baskets with small sample size when the false-discovery rate is controlled as opposed to the family-wise error rate. For example, when only the breast basket was active, with a sample size of 25, the power was 0.76 when the false-discovery rate was controlled at 0.05 but only 0.56 when the family-wise error rate was controlled at 0.05, indicating that impractical sample sizes for the phase II setting would be needed to achieve acceptable power while controlling the family-wise error rate in this setting of a trial with 10 baskets.
Conclusion:
Selection of the prior exchangeability probability based on calibration and incorporation of false-discovery rate control result in multisource exchangeability model designs with high power to detect promising treatments in the context of phase II basket trials.
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 Proportion
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...
Binomial Probability Distribution
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,...
Bonferroni Test
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
Expected Frequencies in Goodness-of-Fit Tests
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
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%...
Blinding

