Article
How to use prior knowledge and still give new data a chance?
Search Medline for
Authors
Published: | August 27, 2015 |
---|
Outline
Text
In the context of rare disease and therefore limited resources in terms of patients for clinical trials, it
is often assumed that Bayesian analysis is a possibility to achieve evidence for efficacy of new drugs
or therapy principles more efficiently. The main reason for this assumption is the opportunity to use
additional information through a prior believe or knowledge about this efficacy. However, little is said
about the true impact of this prior assumption about efficacy on the evaluation of outcome.
Using example studies we give an overview of different problems connected to Bayesian analysis with
informative and non-informative prior probabilities. We know that using non-informative priors
usually does not lead to substantially different conclusions than in the frequentist approach, although
even the assumption of non-informative priors can promote the aim of a study to demonstrate either
non-inferiority or superiority. When using informative priors based on data from other studies these
may completely determine conclusions of the trial at hand. It is thus important to balance the impact
of the prior assumption against the information to be derived in the current trial, so that collected
data still has a chance to change prior believe if substantially different.