Rare disease clinical trials face challenges due to limited sample sizes and ethical imperatives to minimize futile treatments. Bayesian sequential design dynamically optimizes decisions under uncertainty, offering efficiency gains over traditional fixed-sample approaches.
Methods
Propose a framework integrating sequential Bayes factor and adaptive stopping rules for trials with binary endpoint. Bayesian posterior probabilities define early termination thresholds (superiority/futility), while Bayes Factor Design Analysis validates trial feasibility. Sequential Bayes factor updates iteratively guide interim decisions based on evidence strength.
Results
The approach enables earlier trial termination (for superiority or futility), reducing sample size, time, and costs. Patients avoid unnecessary exposure to futility treatments, while results remain interpretable even if thresholds are unmet.
Conclusion
The primary goal is to confirm treatment efficacy earlier, enabling trials to be stopped promptly for either superiority or futility treatments. This strategy reduces sample size, time, and financial costs, and prevents patient exposure to futile treatments. Moreover, the study aims to promote the adoption of Bayesian sequential decision-making, thereby accelerating rare disease clinical trial approvals and drug marketing.
MelnikovaI. Rare diseases and orphan drugs. Nat Rev Drug Discovery.2012; 11: 267–268.
7.
EURORDIS. Rare diseases: understanding this public health priority 2005.
8.
Nguengang WakapSLambertDMOlryA, et al.Estimating cumulative point prevalence of rare diseases: analysis of the Orphanet database. Eur J Hum Genet2020; 28: 165–173.
9.
SequeiraARMentzakisEArchangelidiO,et al.The economic and health impact of rare diseases: a meta-analysis. Health Policy Technol2021; 10: 32–44.
10.
Benito-LozanoJArias-MerinoGGómez-MartínezM, et al.Psychosocial impact at the time of a rare disease diagnosis. Plos One2023; 18: e0288875.
11.
JonesBKenwardMG. Design and analysis of cross-over trials. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 1989.
12.
Medicine Io. Rare Diseases and Orphan Products: Accelerating Research and Development. Field MJ, Boat TF, editors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010, 442 p.
13.
AbrahamyanLFeldmanBMTomlinsonG, et al.Alternative designs for clinical trials in rare diseases. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet2016; 172: 313–331.
14.
ChowS-CChangM. Adaptive design methods in clinical trials. 2nd revised ed. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2006.
15.
JiangFJack LeeJMüllerP. A Bayesian decision-theoretic sequential response-adaptive randomization design. Stat Med.2013; 32: 1975–1994.
16.
RouderJNSpeckmanPLSunD, et al.Bayesian T tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychon Bull Rev.2009; 16: 225–237.
17.
BergerJO. Bayes Factors. Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences 2006.
18.
PoschMBauerP. Interim analysis and sample size reassessment. Biometrics2000; 56: 1170–1176.
19.
PocockSJ. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika1977; 64: 191–199.
20.
BrossI. Sequential medical plans. Biometrics1952; 8: 188–205.
21.
ArmitageP. Sequential medical trials. 2nd edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1975.
22.
JennisonCTurnbullBW. Group sequential methods with applications to clinical trials. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 1999.
23.
O'HaganAForsterJJ. Kendall's advanced theory of statistics, volume 2B: Bayesian inference. London: Arnold, 2004.
24.
LewisSMRafteryAE. Estimating Bayes factors via posterior simulation with the laplace—metropolis estimator. J Am Stat Assoc.1997; 92: 648–655.
JohnsonVEPramanikSShuddeR. Bayes Factor functions for reporting outcomes of hypothesis tests. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.2023; 120: e2217331120.
27.
LinRYinG. Bayes Factor and posterior probability: complementary statistical evidence to p-value. Contemp Clin Trials2015; 44: 33–35.
28.
DienesZ. Bayesian Versus orthodox statistics: which side are you on?Perspect Psychol Sci2011; 6: 274–290.
29.
WagenmakersE-J. A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychon Bull Rev.2007; 14: 779–804.
30.
LeeMDWagenmakersE-J. Bayesian cognitive modeling: A practical course. New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press, 2013, xiii, 264-xiii, 264 p.
31.
WagenmakersE-JMoreyRDLeeMD. Bayesian Benefits for the pragmatic researcher. Curr Dir Psychol Sci.2016; 25: 169–176.
32.
ErvenTGrünwaldPde RooijS. Catching up faster by switching sooner: a predictive approach to adaptive estimation with an application to the AIC–BIC dilemma. J R Stat Soc: Ser B (Stat Methodol)2012; 74: 361–417.
33.
DienesZ. Using Bayes to get the most out of non-significant results. Front Psychol.2014; 5.
34.
DienesZ. How Bayes factors change scientific practice. J Math Psychol.2016; 72: 78–89.
35.
CohenJ. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge, 2013.
36.
SchönbrodtFDWagenmakersEJZehetleitnerM,et al.Sequential hypothesis testing with Bayes factors: efficiently testing mean differences. Psychol Methods2017; 22: 322–339.
37.
VisserIKucharskýŠLeveltC, et al.Bayesian Sample size planning for developmental studies. Infant Child Dev.2024; 33: e2412.
38.
WaldAWolfowitzJ. Optimum character of the sequential probability ratio test. Ann Math Stat1948; 19: 326–339.
39.
RoyallR. On the probability of observing misleading statistical evidence. J Am Stat Assoc.2000; 95: 760–768.
40.
O'HaganAStevensJW. Bayesian Assessment of sample size for clinical trials of cost-effectiveness. MedDecis Making: Int J Soc Med Decis Making2001; 21: 219–230.
41.
WalleyRJSmithCLGaleJD,et al.Advantages of a wholly Bayesian approach to assessing efficacy in early drug development: a case study. Pharm Stat2015; 14: 205–215.
42.
ZellnerASiowA. Posterior odds ratios for selected regression hypotheses. Trabajos de Estadistica Y de Investigacion Operativa1980; 31: 585–603.
43.
LiangFPauloRMolinaG, et al.Mixtures of g Priors for Bayesian Variable Selection. J Am Stat Assoc.2008; 103: 410–423.
44.
JiangLYanFThallPF,et al.Comparing Bayesian early stopping boundaries for phase II clinical trials. Pharm Stat2020; 19: 928–939.
45.
KassRERafteryAE. Bayes Factors. J Am Stat Assoc.1995; 90: 773–795.
46.
VerhaartIECRobertsonAWilsonIJ, et al.Prevalence, incidence and carrier frequency of 5q–linked spinal muscular atrophy – a literature review. Orphanet J Rare Dis.2017; 12: 124.
47.
FinkelRSMercuriEDarrasBT, et al.Nusinersen versus Sham control in infantile-onset spinal muscular atrophy. N Engl J Med.2017; 377: 1723–1732.
48.
ZhouHLeeJJYuanY. BOP2: Bayesian optimal design for phase II clinical trials with simple and complex endpoints. Stat Med.2017; 36: 3302–3314.
49.
RouderJN. Optional stopping: no problem for Bayesians. Psychon Bull Rev.2014; 21: 301–308.
50.
HrvatFSpahićLPokvićLG,et al., editors. Artificial Neural Networks for prediction of medical device performance based on conformity assessment data: Infusion and perfusor pumps case study. In: 2020 9th Mediterranean conference on embedded computing (MECO), 2020; IEEE.
51.
SpahićLSredovićUKurpejovićZ, et al.Machine learning for improved medical device management: A focus on infant incubators. Technol Health Care.2025: 09287329241292168.
52.
BadnjevicACifrekMKorugaD, editors. Classification of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) using integrated software suite. In: XIII Mediterranean Conference on Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing 2013: MEDICON 2013, 25–28 September 2013, Seville, Spain; 2014: Springer.
53.
BadnjevićACifrekMKorugaD. Integrated software suite for diagnosis of respiratory diseases. Eurocon 2013, Zagreb, Croatia, 2013, 564–568.
54.
BadnjevićAPokvićLGSmajlhodžić-DeljoM, et al.Application of artificial intelligence for the classification of the clinical outcome and therapy in patients with viral infections: the case of COVID-19. Technol Health Care.2024; 32: 1859–1870.
55.
HunterDJHolmesC. Where medical statistics meets artificial intelligence. N Engl J Med.2023; 389: 1211–1219.
56.
VeljovićEŠpirtović-HalilovićSMuratovićS, et al, editors. Artificial neural network and docking study in design and synthesis of xanthenes as antimicrobial agents. In: CMBEBIH 2017: Proceedings of the International Conference on Medical and Biological Engineering 2017; 2017: Springer.
57.
HassounSJeffersonFShiX, et al.Artificial intelligence for biology. Integr Comp Biol.2022; 61: 2267–2275.
58.
HafizovićLČauševićADeumićA, et al, editors. The use of artificial intelligence in diagnostic medical imaging: systematic literature review. In: 2021 IEEE 21st International Conference on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE); 2021: IEEE.
59.
HametPTremblayJ. Artificial intelligence in medicine. Metab: Clin Exp2017; 69s: S36–s40.
60.
MedjedovicEStanojevicMJonuzovic-ProsicS, et al.Artificial intelligence as a new answer to old challenges in maternal-fetal medicine and obstetrics. Technol Health Care.2024; 32: 1273–1287.
61.
HerbertSRCliffordSMGillesK. Artificial intelligence and Bayesian decision theory in the prediction of chemical carcinogens. Mutat Res/Fundam Mol Mech Mutagen1985; 150: 1–11.
62.
KothariRJonesVMenaD, et al.Raman Spectroscopy and artificial intelligence to predict the Bayesian probability of breast cancer. Sci Rep.2021; 11: 6482.
63.
WojtaraMRanaERahmanT, et al.Artificial intelligence in rare disease diagnosis and treatment. Clin Transl Sci.2023; 16: 2106–2111.
64.
BrasilSPascoalCFranciscoR, et al.Artificial intelligence (AI) in rare diseases: is the future brighter?Genes (Basel).2019; 10: 978.
65.
HuangBHuangHZhangS, et al.Artificial intelligence in pancreatic cancer. Theranostics2022; 12: 6931–6954.
66.
VisibelliARoncagliaBSpigaO,et al.The impact of artificial intelligence in the odyssey of rare diseases. Biomedicines2023; 11: 887.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
