Optimal Bayesian adaptive trials when treatment efficacy depends on biomarkers

Clinical biomarkers play an important role in precision medicine and are now extensively used in clinical trials, particularly in cancer. A response adaptive trial design enables researchers to use treatment results about earlier patients to aid in treatment decisions of later patients. Optimal adaptive trial designs have been developed without consideration of biomarkers. In this article, we describe the mathematical steps for computing optimal biomarker‐integrated adaptive trial designs. These designs maximize the expected trial utility given any pre‐specified utility function, though we focus here on maximizing patient responses within a given patient horizon. We describe the performance of the optimal design in different scenarios. We compare it to Bayesian Adaptive Randomization (BAR), which is emerging as a practical approach to develop adaptive trials. The difference in expected utility between BAR and optimal designs is smallest when the biomarker subgroups are highly imbalanced. We also compare BAR, a frequentist play‐the‐winner rule with integrated biomarkers and a marker‐stratified balanced randomization design (BR). We show that, in contrasting two treatments, BR achieves a nearly optimal expected utility when the patient horizon is relatively large. Our work provides novel theoretical solution, as well as an absolute benchmark for the evaluation of trial designs in personalized medicine.

[1]  G. Rosner,et al.  Bayesian Designs in Clinical Trials , 2018 .

[2]  J. Wason,et al.  A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi‐stage designs for multi‐arm clinical trials , 2014, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  Lorenzo Trippa,et al.  Biomarker-based adaptive trials for patients with glioblastoma--lessons from I-SPY 2. , 2013, Neuro-oncology.

[4]  J. Savard Personalised Medicine: A Critique on the Future of Health Care , 2013, Journal of Bioethical Inquiry.

[5]  Yifan Zhang,et al.  Combining Experts’ Judgments: Comparison of Algorithmic Methods Using Synthetic Data , 2013, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[6]  G. Parmigiani,et al.  Bayesian adaptive randomized trial design for patients with recurrent glioblastoma. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  Guosheng Yin,et al.  Clinical Trial Design: Bayesian and Frequentist Adaptive Methods , 2011 .

[8]  D. Kerr,et al.  Predictive biomarkers: a paradigm shift towards personalized cancer medicine , 2011, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[9]  Warren B. Powell,et al.  “Approximate dynamic programming: Solving the curses of dimensionality” by Warren B. Powell , 2007, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics.

[10]  K. Anderson,et al.  The BATTLE trial: a bold step toward improving the efficiency of biomarker-based drug development. , 2011, Cancer discovery.

[11]  Edward S. Kim,et al.  The BATTLE trial: personalizing therapy for lung cancer. , 2011, Cancer discovery.

[12]  Jannik N. Andersen,et al.  Cancer genomics: from discovery science to personalized medicine , 2011, Nature Medicine.

[13]  D. Berry Adaptive clinical trials: the promise and the caution. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  F. Collins,et al.  The path to personalized medicine. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  G. Mills,et al.  Future of personalized medicine in oncology: a systems biology approach. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[16]  W. Hong,et al.  Sorafenib treatment efficacy and KRAS biomarker status in the Biomarker-Integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination (BATTLE) trial. , 2010 .

[17]  R. Schilsky Personalized medicine in oncology: the future is now , 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[18]  personalized medicine Bayesian adaptive design for targeted therapy development in lung cancera step toward , 2010 .

[19]  Ultan McDermott,et al.  Personalized cancer therapy with selective kinase inhibitors: an emerging paradigm in medical oncology. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[20]  D. Berry,et al.  I‐SPY 2: An Adaptive Breast Cancer Trial Design in the Setting of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy , 2009, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[21]  Charles Swanton,et al.  Genetic prognostic and predictive markers in colorectal cancer , 2009, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[22]  Lurdes Y. T. Inoue,et al.  Decision Theory: Principles and Approaches , 2009 .

[23]  M. Somerfield,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: testing for KRAS gene mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[24]  Edward S. Kim,et al.  Bayesian adaptive design for targeted therapy development in lung cancer — a step toward personalized medicine , 2008, Clinical trials.

[25]  R. Bernards,et al.  Enabling personalized cancer medicine through analysis of gene-expression patterns , 2008, Nature.

[26]  A. Sparks,et al.  The Genomic Landscapes of Human Breast and Colorectal Cancers , 2007, Science.

[27]  C. Compton Getting to personalized cancer medicine , 2007, Cancer.

[28]  Warren B. Powell,et al.  Approximate Dynamic Programming: Solving the Curses of Dimensionality (Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics) , 2007 .

[29]  Warren B. Powell,et al.  Approximate Dynamic Programming - Solving the Curses of Dimensionality , 2007 .

[30]  P. Thall,et al.  Practical Bayesian adaptive randomisation in clinical trials. , 2007, European journal of cancer.

[31]  Atanu Biswas,et al.  Bayesian Adaptive Biased‐Coin Designs for Clinical Trials with Normal Responses , 2005, Biometrics.

[32]  S. Gabriel,et al.  EGFR Mutations in Lung Cancer: Correlation with Clinical Response to Gefitinib Therapy , 2004, Science.

[33]  Anastasia Ivanova,et al.  A play-the-winner-type urn design with reduced variability , 2003 .

[34]  C. Sawyers,et al.  Efficacy and safety of a specific inhibitor of the BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase in chronic myeloid leukemia. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[35]  J. Bather Decision theory , 2000 .

[36]  L. Norton,et al.  Recombinant humanized anti-HER2 antibody (Herceptin) enhances the antitumor activity of paclitaxel and doxorubicin against HER2/neu overexpressing human breast cancer xenografts. , 1998, Cancer research.

[37]  Lee-Jen Wei,et al.  Play the winner for phase II/III clinical trials. , 1996, Statistics in medicine.

[38]  D. Berry,et al.  Adaptive assignment versus balanced randomization in clinical trials: a decision analysis. , 1995, Statistics in medicine.

[39]  Douglas E. Faries,et al.  A Case Study of an Adaptive Clinical Trial in the Treatment of Out-Patients with Depressive Disorder , 1994 .

[40]  Jeffrey R. Eisele The doubly adaptive biased coin design for sequential clinical trials , 1994 .

[41]  H. Ginsburg Extracorporeal circulation in neonatal respiratory failure: Aprospective randomized study , 1986 .

[42]  R. G. Cornell,et al.  Extracorporeal circulation in neonatal respiratory failure: a prospective randomized study. , 1985, Pediatrics.

[43]  P. Armitage The search for optimality in clinical trials , 1985 .

[44]  L. J. Wei,et al.  The Randomized Play-the-Winner Rule in Medical Trials , 1978 .

[45]  G. J. G. Upton,et al.  The importance of the patient horizon in the sequential analysis of binomial clinical trials , 1976 .

[46]  Paul L. Canner,et al.  Selecting One of Two Treatments When the Responses are Dichotomous , 1970 .

[47]  M. Zelen,et al.  Play the Winner Rule and the Controlled Clinical Trial , 1969 .

[48]  R. Bellman Dynamic programming. , 1957, Science.

[49]  T. Colton A Model for Selecting One of Two Medical Treatments , 1963 .