Current status of Bayesian clinical trials for oncology, 2020
Open accessAbstract
Bayesian methods had established a foothold in developing therapies in oncology trials. METHODS: We identified clinical trials posted on the ClinicalTrials.gov database focused on Oncology trials with a Bayesian approach in their design. Differences in study characteristics such as design, study phase, randomization, masking, purpose of study, main outcomes, gender, age and funding involvement according to Bayesian approach were assessed using Chi-squared or Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: We identified 225 studies with Bayesian components in their design addressing oncological diseases. The most common designs were Bayesian Toxicity Monitoring (26.4%), Model-based designs (36%) Model-assisted designs (8%). Statistical methods such as Bayesian logistic regression model (59.4%), Bayesian piecewise exponential survival regression (10.9%) and the Continual reassessment method (9.4%) were the most used. CONCLUSIONS: Bayesian trials are more common in the early phases of drug development specifically in phase II trials (43.6%). Cancer institutes or Hospitals funded most of the studies retrieved. This type of design has increased over time and represent an innovative means of increasing trial efficiency.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some trials are designed based on bayesian methods.
“Some trials are designed based on bayesian methods.416 417”
From SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials (2025) · cites this paper as [417]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Berry, D. A. (2006) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd1927 · Cited by 728 · see citing works
Dose‐Finding Based on Efficacy–Toxicity Trade‐Offs
Thall, P. F., & Cook, J. D. (2004) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2004.00218.x · Cited by 525 · see citing works
Characteristics of Clinical Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 2007-2010
Califf, R. M. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.3424 · Cited by 516 · see citing works
Bayesian optimal interval designs for phase I clinical trials
Liu, S., & Yuan, Y. (2014) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · doi:10.1111/rssc.12089 · Cited by 356 · see citing works
Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single‐arm clinical trials with multiple outcomes
Thall, P. F., Simon, R. M., & Estey, E. H. (1995) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780140404 · Cited by 300 · see citing works
Bayesian clinical trials in action
Lee, J. J., & Chu, C. T. (2012) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.5404 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
How to avoid common problems when using ClinicalTrials.gov in research: 10 issues to consider
Tse, T., Fain, K. M., & Zarin, D. A. (2018) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.k1452 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Moving Toward Transparency of Clinical Trials
Zarin, D. A., & Tse, T. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1153632 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Characteristics of Oncology Clinical Trials
Hirsch, B. R., Califf, R. M., Cheng, S. K., Tasneem, A., Horton, J., Chiswell, K., Schulman, K. A., Dilts, D. M., & Abernethy, A. P. (2013) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.627 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method
Wheeler, G., Mander, A., Bedding, A. W., Brock, K., Cornelius, V. R., Grieve, A. P., Jaki, T., Love, S., Odondi, L., Weir, C. J., et al. (2019) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-018-0638-z · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Precision oncology: A new era of cancer clinical trials
Renfro, L. A., An, M., & Mandrekar, S. J. (2016) · Cancer Letters · doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2016.03.015 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Walley, R. J., Smith, C. L., Gale, J. D., & Woodward, P. (2015) · Pharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1002/pst.1675 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Subramanian, J., Madadi, A. R., Dandona, M., et al. (2010) · Journal of Thoracic Oncology · doi:10.1097/jto.0b013e3181e76159 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Bayesian Design of Proof-of-Concept Trials
Fisch, R. D., Jones, I., Jones, J. P., Kerman, J., Rosenkranz, G. K., & Schmidli, H. (2014) · Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science · doi:10.1177/2168479014533970 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Using Bayesian adaptive designs to improve phase III trials: a respiratory care example
Ryan, E., Bruce, J., Metcalfe, A. J., et al. (2019) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-019-0739-3 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Application of Bayesian Approach in Cancer Clinical Trial
Bhattacharjee (2014) · World Journal of Oncology · doi:10.14740/wjon842e · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Bayesian clinical trials at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center: An update
Tidwell, R. S. S., Peng, S. A., Chen, M., Liu, D. D., Yuan, Y., & Lee, J. J. (2019) · Clinical Trials · doi:10.1177/1740774519871471 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Asiimwe, I. G., & Rumona, D. (2016) · Research Integrity and Peer Review · doi:10.1186/s41073-016-0017-4 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Accuracy, Safety, and Reliability of Novel Phase I Designs—Response
Zhou, H., Yuan, Y., & Nie, L. (2018) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-18-2677 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Effectiveness of adaptive designs for phase II cancer trials
Fors, M. M., Dupuy, J., & González, C. V. (2011) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2011.09.017 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [5]Berry D.A. Bayesian clinical trials Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 5 2006 27 36 https://doi:10.1038/nrd1927 16485344 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials
Hróbjartsson, A., Boutron, I., Hopewell, S., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Collins, G. S., Tunn, R., Aggarwal, R., Berkwits, M., Berlin, J. A., et al. (2025) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-081660 · Cited by 171 · see citing works
- Authors
- Fors, M., & González, P.
- Affiliations
- Universidad de Las Américas (EC)
- Corresponding author
- Fors, Martha
- Venue
- Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-12
- Volume
- 20
- Pages
- 100658
- ISSN
- 2451-8654 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7554365
- OpenAlex
- W3092410354
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 1.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Greater South Information System
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
- Keywords
- Bayesian clinical trial design, cancer clinical trials, anticancer drug development, continual reassessment method, model-assisted design, model-based design, trial funding, trial efficiency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
