An efficient single-arm Bayesian adaptive trial algorithm to evaluate de-intensified oncologic treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, evaluating de-intensified oncologic treatment strategies can help reduce treatment-related toxicities while preserving patients' quality of life. However, de-intensification is typically evaluated in cancers with a low relapse rate, and if the cancer type is uncommon, a randomized trial may require an impractically extended period to accumulate sufficient events for reliable inferential conclusions. METHOD: This paper introduces a Bayesian adaptive method for the single-arm trial design that provides efficient analysis of survival data under these constraints. By incorporating data from previous studies to establish prior knowledge and a historical control arm, this approach enables robust and accurate estimations and predictions for trial design, sample size determination, and inferential decision-making. To support the implementation of this method, we developed an R package called "BayesAT," which offers significant flexibility in modelling and supports multi-stage interim analyses, particularly for evaluating de-intensified oncologic treatments. RESULT: Our approach is validated through comprehensive simulation studies and sensitivity analyses. Additionally, this algorithm has been applied to a pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma trial, showcasing its capability to effectively leverage information from previous studies and conduct interim analyses that expedite conclusions regarding treatment efficacy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".