Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Informed Bayesian survival analysis

F. Bartoš, F. Aust, JM. Haaf

. 2022 ; 22 (1) : 238. [pub] 20220910

Language English Country England, Great Britain

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

BACKGROUND: We provide an overview of Bayesian estimation, hypothesis testing, and model-averaging and illustrate how they benefit parametric survival analysis. We contrast the Bayesian framework to the currently dominant frequentist approach and highlight advantages, such as seamless incorporation of historical data, continuous monitoring of evidence, and incorporating uncertainty about the true data generating process. METHODS: We illustrate the application of the outlined Bayesian approaches on an example data set, retrospective re-analyzing a colon cancer trial. We assess the performance of Bayesian parametric survival analysis and maximum likelihood survival models with AIC/BIC model selection in fixed-n and sequential designs with a simulation study. RESULTS: In the retrospective re-analysis of the example data set, the Bayesian framework provided evidence for the absence of a positive treatment effect of adding Cetuximab to FOLFOX6 regimen on disease-free survival in patients with resected stage III colon cancer. Furthermore, the Bayesian sequential analysis would have terminated the trial 10.3 months earlier than the standard frequentist analysis. In a simulation study with sequential designs, the Bayesian framework on average reached a decision in almost half the time required by the frequentist counterparts, while maintaining the same power, and an appropriate false-positive rate. Under model misspecification, the Bayesian framework resulted in higher false-negative rate compared to the frequentist counterparts, which resulted in a higher proportion of undecided trials. In fixed-n designs, the Bayesian framework showed slightly higher power, slightly elevated error rates, and lower bias and RMSE when estimating treatment effects in small samples. We found no noticeable differences for survival predictions. We have made the analytic approach readily available to other researchers in the RoBSA R package. CONCLUSIONS: The outlined Bayesian framework provides several benefits when applied to parametric survival analyses. It uses data more efficiently, is capable of considerably shortening the length of clinical trials, and provides a richer set of inferences.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22024435
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20221031100257.0
007      
ta
008      
221017s2022 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1186/s12874-022-01676-9 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)36088281
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Bartoš, František $u Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. f.bartos96@gmail.com $u Institute of Computer Science, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic. f.bartos96@gmail.com
245    10
$a Informed Bayesian survival analysis / $c F. Bartoš, F. Aust, JM. Haaf
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: We provide an overview of Bayesian estimation, hypothesis testing, and model-averaging and illustrate how they benefit parametric survival analysis. We contrast the Bayesian framework to the currently dominant frequentist approach and highlight advantages, such as seamless incorporation of historical data, continuous monitoring of evidence, and incorporating uncertainty about the true data generating process. METHODS: We illustrate the application of the outlined Bayesian approaches on an example data set, retrospective re-analyzing a colon cancer trial. We assess the performance of Bayesian parametric survival analysis and maximum likelihood survival models with AIC/BIC model selection in fixed-n and sequential designs with a simulation study. RESULTS: In the retrospective re-analysis of the example data set, the Bayesian framework provided evidence for the absence of a positive treatment effect of adding Cetuximab to FOLFOX6 regimen on disease-free survival in patients with resected stage III colon cancer. Furthermore, the Bayesian sequential analysis would have terminated the trial 10.3 months earlier than the standard frequentist analysis. In a simulation study with sequential designs, the Bayesian framework on average reached a decision in almost half the time required by the frequentist counterparts, while maintaining the same power, and an appropriate false-positive rate. Under model misspecification, the Bayesian framework resulted in higher false-negative rate compared to the frequentist counterparts, which resulted in a higher proportion of undecided trials. In fixed-n designs, the Bayesian framework showed slightly higher power, slightly elevated error rates, and lower bias and RMSE when estimating treatment effects in small samples. We found no noticeable differences for survival predictions. We have made the analytic approach readily available to other researchers in the RoBSA R package. CONCLUSIONS: The outlined Bayesian framework provides several benefits when applied to parametric survival analyses. It uses data more efficiently, is capable of considerably shortening the length of clinical trials, and provides a richer set of inferences.
650    _2
$a Bayesova věta $7 D001499
650    12
$a nádory tračníku $x farmakoterapie $7 D003110
650    _2
$a přežití bez známek nemoci $7 D018572
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a výzkumný projekt $7 D012107
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Aust, Frederik $u Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Haaf, Julia M $u Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
773    0_
$w MED00006775 $t BMC medical research methodology $x 1471-2288 $g Roč. 22, č. 1 (2022), s. 238
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36088281 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20221017 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20221031100255 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1854253 $s 1175725
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2022 $b 22 $c 1 $d 238 $e 20220910 $i 1471-2288 $m Bmc medical research methodology $n BMC Med Res Methodol $x MED00006775
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20221017

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...