Abstract:BACKGROUND:Randomized controlled trials are considered the gold standard for evaluating experimental treatments but often require large sample sizes. Single-arm trials require smaller sample sizes but are subject to bias when using historical control data for comparative inferences. This article presents a Bayesian adaptive synthetic-control design that exploits historical control data to create a hybrid of a single-arm trial and a randomized controlled trial.METHODS:The Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design has two stages. In stage 1, a prespecified number of patients are enrolled in a single arm given the experimental treatment. Based on the stage 1 data, applying propensity score matching and Bayesian posterior prediction methods, the usefulness of the historical control data for identifying a pseudo sample of matched synthetic-control patients for making comparative inferences is evaluated. If a sufficient number of synthetic controls can be identified, the single-arm trial is continued. If not, the trial is switched to a randomized controlled trial. The performance of The Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design is evaluated by computer simulation.RESULTS:The Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design achieves power and unbiasedness similar to a randomized controlled trial but on average requires a much smaller sample size, provided that the historical control data patients are sufficiently comparable to the trial patients so that a good number of matched controls can be identified in the historical control data. Compared to a single-arm trial, The Bayesian adaptive synthetic control design yields much higher power and much smaller bias.CONCLUSION:The Bayesian adaptive synthetic-control design provides a useful tool for exploiting historical control data to improve the efficiency of single-arm phase II clinical trials, while addressing the problem of bias when comparing trial results to historical control data. The proposed design achieves power similar to a randomized controlled trial but may require a substantially smaller sample size.

Estimation of the odds ratio from multi‐stage randomized trials

Confidence intervals for odds ratio from multistage randomized phase II trials

Bayesian Optimal Phase II Design for Randomized Clinical Trials

BASIC: A Bayesian Adaptive Synthetic-Control Design for Phase II Clinical Trials.

Statistical Inference for Extended or Shortened Phase II Studies Based on Simon’s Two-Stage Designs

A class of computational methods to reduce selection bias when designing Phase 3 clinical trials

Optimization the Design of Fixed and Group Sequential Three-Arm Non-Inferiority Trials with Dichotomous Endpoints of Risk Difference and Odds Ratio

A Bayesian Response-Adaptive Covariate-Balanced Randomization Design with Application to A Leukemia Clinical Trial

Combining estimates of the odds ratio: the state of the art

A two-stage Fisher exact test for multi-arm studies with binary outcome variables

Two-dimensional calibration-free odds design for phase I drug-combination trials

Comparison of tests for categorical data from a stratified cluster randomized trial

Estimating an adjusted risk difference in a cluster randomized trial with individual-level analyses

Randomized phase II selection design with order constrained strata

Bayesian Optimal Designs for Multi-Arm Multi-Stage Phase II Randomized Clinical Trials with Multiple Endpoints

Semiparametric maximum likelihood estimation with two-phase stratified case-control sampling

Clarifying the Role of the Mantel-Haenszel Risk Difference Estimator in Randomized Clinical Trials

Tests for equivalence based on odds ratio for matched-pair design

Optimal curtailed designs for single arm phase II clinical trials

An optimised multi-arm multi-stage clinical trial design for unknown variance

What'S the Relative Risk? A Method of Correcting the Odds Ratio in Cohort Studies of Common Outcomes