Quantification of prior impact in terms of effective current sample size

Bayesian methods allow borrowing of historical information through prior distributions. The concept of prior effective sample size (prior ESS) facilitates quantification and communication of such prior information by equating it to a sample size. Prior information can arise from historical observations; thus, the traditional approach identifies the ESS with such a historical sample size. However, this measure is independent of newly observed data, and thus would not capture an actual “loss of information” induced by the prior in case of prior-data conflict. We build on a recent work to relate prior impact to the number of (virtual) samples from the current data model and introduce the effective current sample size (ECSS) of a prior, tailored to the application in Bayesian clinical trial designs. Special emphasis is put on robust mixture, power, and commensurate priors. We apply the approach to an adaptive design in which the number of recruited patients is adjusted depending on the effective sample size at an interim analysis. We argue that the ECSS is the appropriate measure in this case, as the aim is to save current (as opposed to historical) patients from recruitment. Furthermore, the ECSS can help overcome lack of consensus in the ESS assessment of mixture priors and can, more broadly, provide further insights into the impact of priors. An R package accompanies the paper.     

Bayesian sample size determination using commensurate priors to leverage preexperimental data

This paper develops Bayesian sample size formulae for experiments comparing two groups, where relevant preexperimental information from multiple sources can be incorporated in a robust prior to support both the design and analysis. We use commensurate predictive priors for borrowing of information and further place Gamma mixture priors on the precisions to account for preliminary belief about the pairwise (in)commensurability between parameters that underpin the historical and new experiments. Averaged over the probability space of the new experimental data, appropriate sample sizes are found according to criteria that control certain aspects of the posterior distribution, such as the coverage probability or length of a defined density region. Our Bayesian methodology can be applied to circumstances that compare two normal means, proportions, or event times. When nuisance parameters (such as variance) in the new experiment are unknown, a prior distribution can further be specified based on preexperimental data. Exact solutions are available based on most of the criteria considered for Bayesian sample size determination, while a search procedure is described in cases for which there are no closed-form expressions. We illustrate the application of our sample size formulae in the design of clinical trials, where pretrial information is available to be leveraged. Hypothetical data examples, motivated by a rare-disease trial with an elicited expert prior opinion, and a comprehensive performance evaluation of the proposed methodology are presented.     

An efficient sample size adaptation strategy with adjustment of randomization ratio

In clinical trials, sample size reestimation is a useful strategy for mitigating the risk of uncertainty in design assumptions and ensuring sufficient power for the final analysis. In particular, sample size reestimation based on unblinded interim effect size can often lead to sample size increase, and statistical adjustment is usually needed for the final analysis to ensure that type I error rate is appropriately controlled. In current literature, sample size reestimation and corresponding type I error control are discussed in the context of maintaining the original randomization ratio across treatment groups, which we refer to as “proportional increase.” In practice, not all studies are designed based on an optimal randomization ratio due to practical reasons. In such cases, when sample size is to be increased, it is more efficient to allocate the additional subjects such that the randomization ratio is brought closer to an optimal ratio. In this research, we propose an adaptive randomization ratio change when sample size increase is warranted. We refer to this strategy as “nonproportional increase,” as the number of subjects increased in each treatment group is no longer proportional to the original randomization ratio. The proposed method boosts power not only through the increase of the sample size, but also via efficient allocation of the additional subjects. The control of type I error rate is shown analytically. Simulations are performed to illustrate the theoretical results.     

A general approach to sample size determination for prevalence surveys that use dual test protocols

We develop a Bayesian simulation based approach for determining the sample size required for estimating a binomial probability and the difference between two binomial probabilities where we allow for dependence between two fallible diagnostic procedures. Examples include estimating the prevalence of disease in a single population based on results from two imperfect diagnostic tests applied to sampled individuals, or surveys designed to compare the prevalences of two populations using diagnostic outcomes that are subject to misclassification. We propose a two stage procedure in which the tests are initially assumed to be independent conditional on true disease status (i.e. conditionally independent). An interval based sample size determination scheme is performed under this assumption and data are collected and used to test the conditional independence assumption. If the data reveal the diagnostic tests to be conditionally dependent, structure is added to the model to account for dependence and the sample size routine is repeated in order to properly satisfy the criterion under the correct model. We also examine the impact on required sample size when adding an extra heterogeneous population to a study.     

Sample size reestimation by Bayesian prediction

We review a Bayesian predictive approach for interim data monitoring and propose its application to interim sample size reestimation for clinical trials. Based on interim data, this approach predicts how the sample size of a clinical trial needs to be adjusted so as to claim a success at the conclusion of the trial with an expected probability. The method is compared with predictive power and conditional power approaches using clinical trial data. Advantages of this approach over the others are discussed.     

Bayesian sample size calculations for comparing two strategies in SMART studies

In the management of most chronic conditions characterized by the lack of universally effective treatments, adaptive treatment strategies (ATSs) have grown in popularity as they offer a more individualized approach. As a result, sequential multiple assignment randomized trials (SMARTs) have gained attention as the most suitable clinical trial design to formalize the study of these strategies. While the number of SMARTs has increased in recent years, sample size and design considerations have generally been carried out in frequentist settings. However, standard frequentist formulae require assumptions on interim response rates and variance components. Misspecifying these can lead to incorrect sample size calculations and correspondingly inadequate levels of power. The Bayesian framework offers a straightforward path to alleviate some of these concerns. In this paper, we provide calculations in a Bayesian setting to allow more realistic and robust estimates that account for uncertainty in inputs through the ‘two priors’ approach. Additionally, compared to the standard frequentist formulae, this methodology allows us to rely on fewer assumptions, integrate pre-trial knowledge, and switch the focus from the standardized effect size to the MDD. The proposed methodology is evaluated in a thorough simulation study and is implemented to estimate the sample size for a full-scale SMART of an internet-based adaptive stress management intervention on cardiovascular disease patients using data from its pilot study conducted in two Canadian provinces.     

Age-at-death estimation in an Italian historical sample: A test of the Suchey-Brooks and transition analysis methods

A growing body of research is demonstrating increased accuracy in aging from a relatively new method, transition analysis. Although transition analysis was developed for paleodemographic research, a majority of subsequent studies have been in the forensic arena, with very little work in bioarchaeological contexts. Using the Suchey‐Brooks pubic symphysis phases, scored on a target sample of historic Italians from the island of Sardinia, we compare accuracy of aging between transition analysis combined with a Bayesian approach and the standard Suchey‐Brooks age ranges. Because of the difficulty in identifying a reasonable informative prior for bioarchaeological samples, we also compared results of both an informative prior and a uniform prior for age estimation. Published ages‐of‐transition for the Terry Collection and Balkan genocide victims were used in conjunction with parameters generated from Gompertz hazard models derived from the priors. The ages‐of‐transition and hazard parameters were utilized to calculate the highest posterior density regions, otherwise known as “coverages” or age ranges, for each Suchey‐Brooks phase. Each prior, along with the parameters, were input into cumulative binomial tests. The results indicate that the Bayesian approach outperformed the Suchey‐Brooks technique alone. The Terry Collection surpassed the Balkans as a reasonable sample from which to derive transition analysis parameters. This discrepancy between populations is due to different within phase age‐at‐death distributions that reflect differences in aging between the populations. These results indicate bioarchaeologists should strive to apply a Bayesian analysis when aging historic and archaeological populations by employing an informative prior. Am J Phys Anthropol 149:259–265, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Bayesian Methods for Regression Using Surrogate Variables

If a dependent variable in a regression analysis is exceptionally expensive or hard to obtain the overall sample size used to fit the model may be limited. To avoid this one may use a cheaper or more easily collected “surrogate” variable to supplement the expensive variable. The regression analysis will be enhanced to the degree the surrogate is associated with the costly dependent variable. We develop a Bayesian approach incorporating surrogate variables in regression based on a two‐stage experiment. Illustrative examples are given, along with comparisons to an existing frequentist method. (© 2004 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)     

An optimal Bayesian predictive probability design for phase II clinical trials with simple and complicated endpoints

Most existing phase II clinical trial designs focus on conventional chemotherapy with binary tumor response as the endpoint. The advent of novel therapies, such as molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapy, has made the endpoint of phase II trials more complicated, often involving ordinal, nested, and coprimary endpoints. We propose a simple and flexible Bayesian optimal phase II predictive probability (OPP) design that handles binary and complex endpoints in a unified way. The Dirichlet-multinomial model is employed to accommodate different types of endpoints. At each interim, given the observed interim data, we calculate the Bayesian predictive probability of success, should the trial continue to the maximum planned sample size, and use it to make the go/no-go decision. The OPP design controls the type I error rate, maximizes power or minimizes the expected sample size, and is easy to implement, because the go/no-go decision boundaries can be enumerated and included in the protocol before the onset of the trial. Simulation studies show that the OPP design has satisfactory operating characteristics.     

Subset selection for linear mixed models

Linear mixed models (LMMs) are instrumental for regression analysis with structured dependence, such as grouped, clustered, or multilevel data. However, selection among the covariates—while accounting for this structured dependence—remains a challenge. We introduce a Bayesian decision analysis for subset selection with LMMs. Using a Mahalanobis loss function that incorporates the structured dependence, we derive optimal linear coefficients for (i) any given subset of variables and (ii) all subsets of variables that satisfy a cardinality constraint. Crucially, these estimates inherit shrinkage or regularization and uncertainty quantification from the underlying Bayesian model, and apply for any well-specified Bayesian LMM. More broadly, our decision analysis strategy deemphasizes the role of a single “best” subset, which is often unstable and limited in its information content, and instead favors a collection of near-optimal subsets. This collection is summarized by key member subsets and variable-specific importance metrics. Customized subset search and out-of-sample approximation algorithms are provided for more scalable computing. These tools are applied to simulated data and a longitudinal physical activity dataset, and demonstrate excellent prediction, estimation, and selection ability.     

Cost analysis in choosing group size when group testing for Potato virus Y in the presence of classification errors

In many areas of the world, Potato virus Y (PVY) is one of the most economically important disease problems in seed potatoes. In Taiwan, generation 2 (G2) class certified seed potatoes are required by law to be free of detectable levels of PVY. To meet this standard, it is necessary to perform accurate tests at a reasonable cost. We used a two‐stage testing design involving group testing which was performed in Taiwan's Seed Improvement and Propagation Station to identify plants infected with PVY. At the first stage of this two‐stage testing design, plants are tested in groups. The second stage involves no retesting for negative test groups and exhaustive testing of all constituent individual samples from positive test groups. In order to minimise costs while meeting government standards, it is imperative to estimate optimal group size. However, because of limited test accuracy, classification errors for diagnostic tests are inevitable; to get a more accurate estimate, it is necessary to adjust for these errors. Therefore, this paper describes an analysis of diagnostic test data in which specimens are grouped for batched testing to offset costs. The optimal batch size is determined by various cost parameters as well as test sensitivity, specificity and disease prevalence. Here, the Bayesian method is employed to deal with uncertainty in these parameters. Moreover, we developed a computer program to determine optimal group size for PVY tests such that the expected cost is minimised even when using imperfect diagnostic tests of pooled samples. Results from this research show that, compared with error free testing, when the presence of diagnostic testing errors is taken into account, the optimal group size becomes smaller. Higher diagnostic testing costs, lower costs of false negatives or smaller prevalence can all lead to a larger optimal group size. Regarding the effects of sensitivity and specificity, optimal group size increases as sensitivity increases; however, specificity has little effect on determining optimal group size. From our simulated study, it is apparent that the Bayesian method can truly update the prior information to more closely approximate the intrinsic characteristics of the parameters of interest. We believe that the results of this study will be useful in the implementation of seed potato certification programmes, particularly those which require zero tolerance for quarantine diseases in certified tubers.     

Optimal designs for estimating and testing interaction among multiple loci in complex traits by a Gibbs sampler

A simulation study was conducted to provide a practical guideline for experimental designs with the Bayesian approach using Gibbs sampling (BAGS), a recently developed method for estimating interaction among multiple loci. Various data sets were simulated from combinations of number of loci, within-genotype variance, sample size, and balance of design. Mean square prediction error (MSPE) and empirical statistical power were obtained from estimating and testing the posterior mean estimate of combination genotypic effect. Simultaneous use of both MSPE and power was suggested to find an optimal design because their correlation estimate (− 0.8) would not be large enough to ignore either of them. The optimal sample sizes with MSPE > 2.0 and power > 0.8 with the within-genotype variance of 30 were 135, 675, and > 8100 for 2-, 3-, and 4-locus unbalanced data. The BAGS was suggested for interaction effects among limited number (4 or less) of loci in practice. A practical guideline for determining an optimal sample size with a given power or vise versa is provided for BAGS.     

Bayesian sample size determination for prevalence and diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard test

Planning studies involving diagnostic tests is complicated by the fact that virtually no test provides perfectly accurate results. The misclassification induced by imperfect sensitivities and specificities of diagnostic tests must be taken into account, whether the primary goal of the study is to estimate the prevalence of a disease in a population or to investigate the properties of a new diagnostic test. Previous work on sample size requirements for estimating the prevalence of disease in the case of a single imperfect test showed very large discrepancies in size when compared to methods that assume a perfect test. In this article we extend these methods to include two conditionally independent imperfect tests, and apply several different criteria for Bayesian sample size determination to the design of such studies. We consider both disease prevalence studies and studies designed to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests. As the problem is typically nonidentifiable, we investigate the limits on the accuracy of parameter estimation as the sample size approaches infinity. Through two examples from infectious diseases, we illustrate the changes in sample sizes that arise when two tests are applied to individuals in a study rather than a single test. Although smaller sample sizes are often found in the two-test situation, they can still be prohibitively large unless accurate information is available about the sensitivities and specificities of the tests being used.     

Hierarchical commensurate and power prior models for adaptive incorporation of historical information in clinical trials

Bayesian clinical trial designs offer the possibility of a substantially reduced sample size, increased statistical power, and reductions in cost and ethical hazard. However when prior and current information conflict, Bayesian methods can lead to higher than expected type I error, as well as the possibility of a costlier and lengthier trial. This motivates an investigation of the feasibility of hierarchical Bayesian methods for incorporating historical data that are adaptively robust to prior information that reveals itself to be inconsistent with the accumulating experimental data. In this article, we present several models that allow for the commensurability of the information in the historical and current data to determine how much historical information is used. A primary tool is elaborating the traditional power prior approach based upon a measure of commensurability for Gaussian data. We compare the frequentist performance of several methods using simulations, and close with an example of a colon cancer trial that illustrates a linear models extension of our adaptive borrowing approach. Our proposed methods produce more precise estimates of the model parameters, in particular, conferring statistical significance to the observed reduction in tumor size for the experimental regimen as compared to the control regimen.     

Determining the effective sample size of a parametric prior

Summary .   We present a definition for the effective sample size of a parametric prior distribution in a Bayesian model, and propose methods for computing the effective sample size in a variety of settings. Our approach first constructs a prior chosen to be vague in a suitable sense, and updates this prior to obtain a sequence of posteriors corresponding to each of a range of sample sizes. We then compute a distance between each posterior and the parametric prior, defined in terms of the curvature of the logarithm of each distribution, and the posterior minimizing the distance defines the effective sample size of the prior. For cases where the distance cannot be computed analytically, we provide a numerical approximation based on Monte Carlo simulation. We provide general guidelines for application, illustrate the method in several standard cases where the answer seems obvious, and then apply it to some nonstandard settings.     

Bayesian design of biosimilars clinical programs involving multiple therapeutic indications

In this paper, we propose a Bayesian design framework for a biosimilars clinical program that entails conducting concurrent trials in multiple therapeutic indications to establish equivalent efficacy for a proposed biologic compared to a reference biologic in each indication to support approval of the proposed biologic as a biosimilar. Our method facilitates information borrowing across indications through the use of a multivariate normal correlated parameter prior (CPP), which is constructed from easily interpretable hyperparameters that represent direct statements about the equivalence hypotheses to be tested. The CPP accommodates different endpoints and data types across indications (eg, binary and continuous) and can, therefore, be used in a wide context of models without having to modify the data (eg, rescaling) to provide reasonable information-borrowing properties. We illustrate how one can evaluate the design using Bayesian versions of the type I error rate and power with the objective of determining the sample size required for each indication such that the design has high power to demonstrate equivalent efficacy in each indication, reasonably high power to demonstrate equivalent efficacy simultaneously in all indications (ie, globally), and reasonable type I error control from a Bayesian perspective. We illustrate the method with several examples, including designing biosimilars trials for follicular lymphoma and rheumatoid arthritis using binary and continuous endpoints, respectively.     

Bayesian Analysis for Linearized Multi-Stage Models in Quantal Bioassay

Bayesian methods for estimating dose response curves from linearized multi-stage models in quantal bioassay are studied. A Gibbs sampling approach with data augmentation is employed to compute the Bayes estimates. In addition, estimation of the “relative additional risk” and the “risk specific dose” is studied. Model selection based on conditional predictive ordinates from cross-validated data is developed. Model adequacy is addressed by means of a posterior predictive tail-area test.     

A Bayesian basket trial design that borrows information across strata based on the similarity between the posterior distributions of the response probability

Basket trials simultaneously evaluate the effect of one or more drugs on a defined biomarker, genetic alteration, or molecular target in a variety of disease subtypes, often called strata. A conventional approach for analyzing such trials is an independent analysis of each of the strata. This analysis is inefficient as it lacks the power to detect the effect of drugs in each stratum. To address these issues, various designs for basket trials have been proposed, centering on designs using Bayesian hierarchical models. In this article, we propose a novel Bayesian basket trial design that incorporates predictive sample size determination, early termination for inefficacy and efficacy, and the borrowing of information across strata. The borrowing of information is based on the similarity between the posterior distributions of the response probability. In general, Bayesian hierarchical models have many distributional assumptions along with multiple parameters. By contrast, our method has prior distributions for response probability and two parameters for similarity of distributions. The proposed design is easier to implement and less computationally demanding than other Bayesian basket designs. Through a simulation with various scenarios, our proposed design is compared with other designs including one that does not borrow information and one that uses a Bayesian hierarchical model.     

A hierarchical Bayesian regression model that reduces uncertainty in material demand predictions

Predictions of metal consumption are vital for criticality assessments and sustainability analyses. Although demand for a material varies strongly by region and end-use sector, statistical models of demand typically predict demand using regression analyses at an aggregated global level (“fully pooled models”). “Un-pooled” regression models that predict demand at a disaggregated country or regional level face challenges due to limited data availability and large uncertainty. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian hierarchical model that can simultaneously identify heterogeneous demand parameters (like price and income elasticities) for individual regions and sectors, as well as global parameters. We demonstrate the model's value by estimating income and price elasticity of copper demand in five sectors (Transportation, Electrical, Construction, Manufacturing, and Other) and five regions (North America, Europe, Japan, China, and Rest of World). To validate the benefits of the Bayesian approach, we compare the model to both a “fully pooled” and an “un-pooled” model. The Bayesian model can predict global demand with similar uncertainty as a fully pooled regression model, while additionally capturing regional heterogeneity in income elasticity of demand. Compared to un-pooled models that predict demand for individual countries and sectors separately, our model reduces the uncertainty of parameter estimates by more than 50%. The hierarchical Bayesian modeling approach we propose can be used for various commodities, improving material demand projections used to study the impact of policies on mining sector emissions and informing investment in critical material production.     

Power analysis and sample size estimation for RNA-Seq differential expression

It is crucial for researchers to optimize RNA-seq experimental designs for differential expression detection. Currently, the field lacks general methods to estimate power and sample size for RNA-Seq in complex experimental designs, under the assumption of the negative binomial distribution. We simulate RNA-Seq count data based on parameters estimated from six widely different public data sets (including cell line comparison, tissue comparison, and cancer data sets) and calculate the statistical power in paired and unpaired sample experiments. We comprehensively compare five differential expression analysis packages (DESeq, edgeR, DESeq2, sSeq, and EBSeq) and evaluate their performance by power, receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves, and other metrics including areas under the curve (AUC), Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC), and F-measures. DESeq2 and edgeR tend to give the best performance in general. Increasing sample size or sequencing depth increases power; however, increasing sample size is more potent than sequencing depth to increase power, especially when the sequencing depth reaches 20 million reads. Long intergenic noncoding RNAs (lincRNA) yields lower power relative to the protein coding mRNAs, given their lower expression level in the same RNA-Seq experiment. On the other hand, paired-sample RNA-Seq significantly enhances the statistical power, confirming the importance of considering the multifactor experimental design. Finally, a local optimal power is achievable for a given budget constraint, and the dominant contributing factor is sample size rather than the sequencing depth. In conclusion, we provide a power analysis tool (http://www2.hawaii.edu/~lgarmire/RNASeqPowerCalculator.htm) that captures the dispersion in the data and can serve as a practical reference under the budget constraint of RNA-Seq experiments.