Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
It is well-known that both frequentist and Bayesian clinical trial designs have their own advantages and disadvantages. To have better properties inherited from these two types of designs, we developed a Bayesian-frequentist two-stage single-arm phase II clinical trial design. This design allows both early acceptance and rejection of the null hypothesis ( H(0) ). The measures (for example probability of trial early termination, expected sample size, etc.) of the design properties under both frequentist and Bayesian settings are derived. Moreover, under the Bayesian setting, the upper and lower boundaries are determined with predictive probability of trial success outcome. Given a beta prior and a sample size for stage I, based on the marginal distribution of the responses at stage I, we derived Bayesian Type I and Type II error rates. By controlling both frequentist and Bayesian error rates, the Bayesian-frequentist two-stage design has special features compared with other two-stage designs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dong et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: