Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2024 Dec;21(6):689-700.
doi: 10.1177/17407745241247334. Epub 2024 May 16.

A comparison of computational algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of clinical trials

Affiliations
Comparative Study

A comparison of computational algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of clinical trials

Ziming Chen et al. Clin Trials. 2024 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Clinical trials are increasingly using Bayesian methods for their design and analysis. Inference in Bayesian trials typically uses simulation-based approaches such as Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. Markov Chain Monte Carlo has high computational cost and can be complex to implement. The Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations algorithm provides approximate Bayesian inference without the need for computationally complex simulations, making it more efficient than Markov Chain Monte Carlo. The practical properties of Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations compared to Markov Chain Monte Carlo have not been considered for clinical trials. Using data from a published clinical trial, we aim to investigate whether Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations is a feasible and accurate alternative to Markov Chain Monte Carlo and provide practical guidance for trialists interested in Bayesian trial design.

Methods: Data from an international Bayesian multi-platform adaptive trial that compared therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin to usual care in non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were used to fit Bayesian hierarchical generalized mixed models. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was compared to two Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithms, implemented in the software JAGS and stan, using packages available in the statistical software R. Seven outcomes were analysed: organ-support free days (an ordinal outcome), five binary outcomes related to survival and length of hospital stay, and a time-to-event outcome. The posterior distributions for the treatment and sex effects and the variances for the hierarchical effects of age, site and time period were obtained. We summarized these posteriors by calculating the mean, standard deviations and the 95% equitailed credible intervals and presenting the results graphically. The computation time for each algorithm was recorded.

Results: The average overlap of the 95% credible interval for the treatment and sex effects estimated using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was 96% and 97.6% compared with stan, respectively. The graphical posterior densities for these effects overlapped for all three algorithms. The posterior mean for the variance of the hierarchical effects of age, site and time estimated using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations are within the 95% credible interval estimated using Markov Chain Monte Carlo but the average overlap of the credible interval is lower, 77%, 85.6% and 91.3%, respectively, for Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations compared to stan. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations and stan were easily implemented in clear, well-established packages in R, while JAGS required the direct specification of the model. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was between 85 and 269 times faster than stan and 26 and 1852 times faster than JAGS.

Conclusion: Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations could reduce the computational complexity of Bayesian analysis in clinical trials as it is easy to implement in R, substantially faster than Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods implemented in JAGS and stan, and provides near identical approximations to the posterior distributions for the treatment effect. Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations was less accurate when estimating the posterior distribution for the variance of hierarchical effects, particularly for the proportional odds model, and future work should determine if the Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations algorithm can be adjusted to improve this estimation.

Keywords: Bayesian clinical trial analysis; Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations; JAGS; Markov chain Monte Carlo; logistic regression; proportional odds model; stan; survival analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: JSB is on the advisory board Advisory for Amgen and Janssen outside the submitted work. LAC holds a Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada National New Investigator Award, and a Tier 2 research Chair in Thrombosis and Anticoagulation Safety from the University of Ottawa. LZK is a consultant for Cerus, Gamma Diagnostics and the University of Maryland. MDN is served as the Co-Chair of the ACTIV4a trial.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The observed distribution of organ support free days, the primary outcome, from the combined data from the ATTACC/ACTIV-4A trials.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The observed distribution of length of hospital stay, a key secondary outcome, from the combined data from the ATTACC/ACTIV-4A trials.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Posterior density curves for five parameters of interest (from left to right), (1) the effect of sex and (2) treatment with therapeutic anti-coagulation on the outcome and the hierarchical variance for the effect of (3) age, (4) site and (5) time period. These are estimated for three outcomes, (a) Organ Support Free Days, (b) survival with no organ support, and (c) length of hospital stay. The posterior distributions are estimated with INLA, JAGS, and stan.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Van de Schoot R, Kaplan D, Denissen J, et al. A gentle introduction to Bayesian analysis: applications to developmental research. Child Dev 2014; 85(3): 842–860. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Berry DA. Bayesian clinical trials. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006; 5(1): 27–36. - PubMed
    1. Crider KS, Devine O, Hao L, et al. Population red blood cell folate concentrations for prevention of neural tube defects: Bayesian model. BMJ 2014; 349: g4554. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Muss HB, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy in older women with early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2009; 360(20): 2055–2065. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brophy JM. Bayesian interpretation of the EXCEL trial and other randomized clinical trials of left main coronary artery revascularization. JAMA Intern Med 2020; 180(7): 986–992. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types