The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Robust meta‐analytic‐predictive priors in clinical trials with historical control information
Abstract
Summary: Historical information is always relevant for clinical trial design. Additionally, if incorporated in the analysis of a new trial, historical data allow to reduce the number of subjects. This decreases costs and trial duration, facilitates recruitment, and may be more ethical. Yet, under prior‐data conflict, a too optimistic use of historical data may be inappropriate. We address this challenge by deriving a Bayesian meta‐analytic‐predictive prior from historical data, which is then combined with the new data. This prospective approach is equivalent to a meta‐analytic‐combined analysis of historical and new data if parameters are exchangeable across trials. The prospective Bayesian version requires a good approximation of the meta‐analytic‐predictive prior, which is not available analytically. We propose two‐ or three‐component mixtures of standard priors, which allow for good approximations and, for the one‐parameter exponential family, straightforward posterior calculations. Moreover, since one of the mixture components is usually vague, mixture priors will often be heavy‐tailed and therefore robust. Further robustness and a more rapid reaction to prior‐data conflicts can be achieved by adding an extra weakly‐informative mixture component. Use of historical prior information is particularly attractive for adaptive trials, as the randomization ratio can then be changed in case of prior‐data conflict. Both frequentist operating characteristics and posterior summaries for various data scenarios show that these designs have desirable properties. We illustrate the methodology for a phase II proof‐of‐concept trial with historical controls from four studies. Robust meta‐analytic‐predictive priors alleviate prior‐data conflicts ' they should encourage better and more frequent use of historical data in clinical trials.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sampling-based approaches to calculating marginal densities
Gelfand, A. E., & Smith, A. F. M. (1990) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1990.10476213 · Cited by 6,606
WinBUGS - A Bayesian modelling framework: Concepts, structure, and extensibility
Lunn, D. J., Thomas, A., Best, N., & Spiegelhalter, D. (2000) · Statistics and Computing · doi:10.1023/a:1008929526011 · Cited by 5,368
Self-citationGelman, A. (2006) · Bayesian Analysis · doi:10.1214/06-ba117a · Cited by 4,050 · cited 3×
“For the case where only one historical study is available, the challenging problem of a Bayesian meta-analysis with only two studies (one historical, and one new) has to be addressed, in particular the choice of an appropriate informative prior distribution for τ (Gelman, 2006).”
BackgroundOptimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials.
Simon, R. (1989) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90015-9 · Cited by 3,636
Bernardo, J. M., & Smith, A. F. M. (1994) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9780470316870 · Cited by 2,178
Bayesian Approaches to Clinical Trials and Health‐Care Evaluation
Spiegelhalter, D. J., Abrams, K. R., & Myles, J. P. (2003) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/0470092602 · Cited by 1,673
Self-citationPrior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical modelsPreprint
Gelman, A. (2004) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 1,564
Hueber, W., Sands, B. E., Lewitzky, S., Vandemeulebroecke, M., Reinisch, W., Higgins, P. D. R., Wehkamp, J., Feagan, B. G., Yao, M. D., Karczewski, M., et al. (2012) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2011-301668 · Cited by 1,547
A Reference Bayesian Test for Nested Hypotheses and its Relationship to the Schwarz Criterion
Kass, R. E., & Wasserman, L. (1995) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1995.10476592 · Cited by 1,253
Sampling and Bayes' Inference in Scientific Modelling and Robustness
Box, G. E. P. (1980) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2982063 · Cited by 924
Cited by
Bayesian Random-Effects Meta-Analysis Using the bayesmeta R Package
Röver, C. (2020) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v093.i06 · Cited by 310
Trial of a Preferential Phosphodiesterase 4B Inhibitor for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
Richeldi, L., Azuma, A., Cottin, V., Hesslinger, C., Stowasser, S., Valenzuela, C., Wijsenbeek, M. S., Zoz, D. F., Voss, F., & Maher, T. M. (2022) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2201737 · Cited by 236
Combining randomized and non-randomized evidence in network meta-analysis
Efthimiou, O., Mavridis, D., Debray, T. P. A., Samara, M., Belger, M., Siontis, G. C. M., Leucht, S., Salanti, G., & 4, O. B. O. G. W. P. (2017) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.7223 · Cited by 183
Meta‐analysis of two studies in the presence of heterogeneity with applications in rare diseases
Friede, T., Röver, C., Wandel, S., & Neuenschwander, B. (2017) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.201500236 · Cited by 128
Self-citationBeyond Randomized Clinical Trials: Use of External Controls
Schmidli, H., Häring, D. A., Thomas, M., Cassidy, A., Weber, S., & Bretz, F. (2020) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1002/cpt.1723 · Cited by 125
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmidli, H., Gsteiger, S., Roychoudhury, S., O'Hagan, A., Spiegelhalter, D., & Neuenschwander, B.
- Venue
- Biometrics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-10-29
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1023-1032
- ISSN
- 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0420
- OpenAlex
- W2166992787
- Cited by
- 482
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 13.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Robust meta‐analytic‐predictive priors in clinical trials with historical control information. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/biom.12242
- The paper
- Schmidli, H., Gsteiger, S., Roychoudhury, S., O'Hagan, A., Spiegelhalter, D., & Neuenschwander, B. (2014). Robust meta‐analytic‐predictive priors in clinical trials with historical control information. Biometrics. https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.12242
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.