论文标题
贝叶斯福利风险分析
Bayesian Benefit Risk Analysis
论文作者
论文摘要
批准和评估新药的过程通常非常复杂,这主要是由于需要考虑多个标准。进行的标准方法是进行福利风险分析,通常是在贝叶斯范式下,以说明不确定性并将数据与专家判断相结合,该判断是通过多准则决策分析(MCDA)分数进行操作的。该过程基于合适的模型,以适应数据的关键特征,这些功能通常是混合类型的,并有可能依赖于数据,而因子模型提供了标准选择。本文的贡献是三倍:首先,我们扩展了现有结构化因子模型的家族。其次,我们提供了在它们之间进行选择的框架,该框架结合了拟合和样本外预测性能。第三,我们提出一个可以提供多个好处的顺序估计框架:(i)每当新数据可用时,它使我们能够有效地重新估计MCDA的数量数量,从而了解它们之间的差异差异的潜在波动,(ii)它可以提供有关可见的结论的潜在早期停止的信息,从而降低了不必要的不必要的曝光治疗,从而进一步敞开式处理,不可能进一步曝光,不可造成不可能的处理; (iii)它可能允许根据研究目标动态分配治疗组。顺序估计的缺点是增加的计算时间,但是可以通过有效的顺序蒙特卡洛方案来减轻这种情况,我们在本文中对贝叶斯福利风险分析的背景下量身定制。关于二甲双胍(MET),罗格列酮(RSG)的II型糖尿病患者的真实数据进行了说明,并说明了这两种方法(AVM)。
The process of approving and assessing new drugs is often quite complicated, mainly due to the fact that multiple criteria need to be considered. A standard way to proceed is with benefit risk analysis, often under the Bayesian paradigm to account for uncertainty and combine data with expert judgement, which is operationalised via multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) scores. The procedure is based on a suitable model to accommodate key features of the data, which are typically of mixed type and potentially depended, with factor models providing a standard choice. The contribution of this paper is threefold: first, we extend the family of existing structured factor models. Second, we provide a framework for choosing between them, which combines fit and out-of-sample predictive performance. Third, we present a sequential estimation framework that can offer multiple benefits: (i) it allows us to efficiently re-estimate MCDA scores of different drugs each time new data become available, thus getting an idea on potential fluctuations in differences between them, (ii) it can provide information on potential early stopping in cases of evident conclusions, thus reducing unnecessary further exposure to undesirable treatments; (iii) it can potentially allow to assign treatment groups dynamically based on research objectives. A drawback of sequential estimation is the increased computational time, but this can be mitigated by efficient sequential Monte Carlo schemes which we tailor in this paper to the context of Bayesian benefit risk analysis. The developed methodology is illustrated on real data on Type II diabetes patients who were administered Metformin (MET), Rosiglitazone (RSG) and a combination of the two (AVM).