... BAN2401, an anti-amyloid beta protofibril antibody, did not meet the criteria for success based on a Bayesian analysis at 12 months as the primary endpoint in an 856-patient Phase II clinical study (Study 201).
Which report includes this gem
"By using Bayesian statistics in this uniquely-designed trial we had hoped that it would enable us to demonstrate clinical success faster than more traditional study designs. We now await the final study analysis which will be conducted after 18 months of treatment, which represents an amount of treatment time that is considered as appropriate for assessing efficacy in disease modifying agents for Alzheimer's disease," said Lynn Kramer, MD, Chief Clinical Officer and Chief Medical Officer, Neurology Business Group, Eisai.
[my emphasis]
Now, why would Bayes analysis generate stat sig faster? After all, the real efficacy is purely a function of the compound, not the method of analysis. In particular, there's a finite amount of information in the trial data. Bayes can't (well, not legitimately anyway) add any information. Well, investigators can fiddle with the priors, naturally. Obviously, that didn't work this time.
QED
No comments:
Post a Comment