REDOMA: Bayesian random-effects dose-optimization meta-analysis using spike-and-slab priors

被引:0
|
作者
Yang, Cheng-Han [1 ]
Kwiatkowski, Evan [1 ]
Lee, J. Jack [2 ]
Lin, Ruitao [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Hlth Sci Ctr Houston, Dept Biostat, Houston, TX USA
[2] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Biostat, Houston, TX 77030 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Bayesian methods; dose optimization; meta-analysis; phase I/II trial; spike-and-slab prior; OF-FIT TESTS; MODELS; CALIBRATION;
D O I
10.1002/sim.10107
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
The rise of cutting-edge precision cancer treatments has led to a growing significance of the optimal biological dose (OBD) in modern oncology trials. These trials now prioritize the consideration of both toxicity and efficacy simultaneously when determining the most desirable dosage for treatment. Traditional approaches in early-phase oncology trials have conventionally relied on the assumption of a monotone relationship between treatment efficacy and dosage. However, this assumption may not hold valid for novel oncology therapies. In reality, the dose-efficacy curve of such treatments may reach a plateau at a specific dose, posing challenges for conventional methods in accurately identifying the OBD. Furthermore, achieving reliable identification of the OBD is typically not possible based on a single small-sample trial. With data from multiple phase I and phase I/II trials, we propose a novel Bayesian random-effects dose-optimization meta-analysis (REDOMA) approach to identify the OBD by synthesizing toxicity and efficacy data from each trial. The REDOMA method can address trials with heterogeneous characteristics. We adopt a curve-free approach based on a Gamma process prior to model the average dose-toxicity relationship. In addition, we utilize a Bayesian model selection framework that uses the spike-and-slab prior as an automatic variable selection technique to eliminate monotonic constraints on the dose-efficacy curve. The good performance of the REDOMA method is confirmed by extensive simulation studies.
引用
收藏
页码:3484 / 3502
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Summarizing empirical information on between-study heterogeneity for Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis
    Roever, Christian
    Sturtz, Sibylle
    Lilienthal, Jona
    Bender, Ralf
    Friede, Tim
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2023, 42 (14) : 2439 - 2454
  • [42] Inference using an exact distribution of test statistic for random-effects meta-analysis
    Keisuke Hanada
    Tomoyuki Sugimoto
    Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 2023, 75 : 281 - 302
  • [43] Inference using an exact distribution of test statistic for random-effects meta-analysis
    Hanada, Keisuke
    Sugimoto, Tomoyuki
    ANNALS OF THE INSTITUTE OF STATISTICAL MATHEMATICS, 2023, 75 (02) : 281 - 302
  • [44] Appropriateness of conducting and reporting random-effects meta-analysis in oncology
    Ren, Jinma
    Ma, Jia
    Cappelleri, Joseph C.
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2024, 15 (02) : 326 - 331
  • [45] Fixed-effect and random-effects models in meta-analysis
    Zhai Chunjuan
    Guyatt Gordon
    中华医学杂志英文版, 2024, 137 (01)
  • [46] Fixed-effect and random-effects models in meta-analysis
    Zhai, Chunjuan
    Guyatt, Gordon
    CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2024, 137 (01) : 1 - 4
  • [47] Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update
    DerSimonian, Rebecca
    Kacker, Raghu
    CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2007, 28 (02) : 105 - 114
  • [48] Classical and Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis models with sample quality weights in gene expression studies
    Uma Siangphoe
    Kellie J. Archer
    Nitai D. Mukhopadhyay
    BMC Bioinformatics, 20
  • [49] Classical and Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis models with sample quality weights in gene expression studies
    Siangphoe, Uma
    Archer, Kellie J.
    Mukhopadhyay, Nitai D.
    BMC BIOINFORMATICS, 2019, 20 (1)
  • [50] An alternative pseudolikelihood method for multivariate random-effects meta-analysis
    Chen, Yong
    Hong, Chuan
    Riley, Richard D.
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2015, 34 (03) : 361 - 380