Viele Kert, Berry Scott, Neuenschwander Beat, Amzal Billy, Chen Fang, Enas Nathan, Hobbs Brian, Ibrahim Joseph G, Kinnersley Nelson, Lindborg Stacy, Micallef Sandrine, Roychoudhury Satrajit, Thompson Laura
Berry Consultants, Austin, TX, USA.
Pharm Stat. 2014 Jan-Feb;13(1):41-54. doi: 10.1002/pst.1589. Epub 2013 Aug 5.
Clinical trials rarely, if ever, occur in a vacuum. Generally, large amounts of clinical data are available prior to the start of a study, particularly on the current study's control arm. There is obvious appeal in using (i.e., 'borrowing') this information. With historical data providing information on the control arm, more trial resources can be devoted to the novel treatment while retaining accurate estimates of the current control arm parameters. This can result in more accurate point estimates, increased power, and reduced type I error in clinical trials, provided the historical information is sufficiently similar to the current control data. If this assumption of similarity is not satisfied, however, one can acquire increased mean square error of point estimates due to bias and either reduced power or increased type I error depending on the direction of the bias. In this manuscript, we review several methods for historical borrowing, illustrating how key parameters in each method affect borrowing behavior, and then, we compare these methods on the basis of mean square error, power and type I error. We emphasize two main themes. First, we discuss the idea of 'dynamic' (versus 'static') borrowing. Second, we emphasize the decision process involved in determining whether or not to include historical borrowing in terms of the perceived likelihood that the current control arm is sufficiently similar to the historical data. Our goal is to provide a clear review of the key issues involved in historical borrowing and provide a comparison of several methods useful for practitioners.
临床试验极少在真空中进行(即便有,也极为罕见)。一般来说,在一项研究开始之前就已有大量临床数据可用,尤其是关于当前研究的对照臂的数据。利用(即“借用”)这些信息显然具有吸引力。借助历史数据提供对照臂的信息,在保留当前对照臂参数准确估计值的同时,可以将更多试验资源投入到新治疗方法上。如果历史信息与当前对照数据足够相似,这会在临床试验中带来更准确的点估计、更高的检验效能以及更低的I类错误。然而,如果这种相似性假设不成立,由于偏差,点估计的均方误差可能会增大,并且根据偏差的方向,要么检验效能降低,要么I类错误增加。在本论文中我们回顾了几种历史借用的方法,阐述了每种方法中的关键参数如何影响借用行为,然后,我们基于均方误差、检验效能和I类错误对这些方法进行了比较。我们强调两个主要主题。第一,我们讨论“动态”(相对于“静态”)借用的概念。第二,我们强调在根据当前对照臂与历史数据足够相似的感知可能性来决定是否纳入历史借用时所涉及的决策过程。我们的目标是清晰地回顾历史借用所涉及的关键问题,并对几种对从业者有用的方法进行比较。