Core Concepts

Regulators should design statistical contracts that account for the strategic incentives of agents, ensuring that ineffective proposals are not profitable.

Abstract

The paper discusses a framework for designing statistical contracts between a regulator (the principal) and an experimenter (the agent), such as a pharmaceutical company. The key insight is that the statistical protocol used to establish efficacy affects the behavior of a strategic, self-interested agent - a lower standard of statistical evidence incentivizes the agent to run more trials that are less likely to be effective.
The authors propose a decision-theoretic framework that explicitly accounts for the agent's incentives, such that ineffectual proposals are not profitable. They model this as a game between the principal and the agent, where the agent wishes to make a profit by selling a product, but must seek regulatory approval from the principal, who wishes to ensure that only legitimate products are on the market.
The authors show that the set of incentive-aligned statistical contracts, where null agents cannot profit, is exactly the set of e-values (a measure of statistical evidence). They prove that an incentive-aligned statistical contract is maximin optimal, meaning it performs well across many distributions of agent types. Furthermore, if the principal's utility is linear in the license value, the menu of all e-values is the optimal incentive-aligned contract.
The authors also discuss how the FDA's current protocols may not be incentive-aligned for highly profitable drugs, potentially incentivizing clinical trials for ineffective candidates. They emphasize the importance of designing statistical protocols that account for agent incentives to ensure high social utility.

Stats

The probability that a placebo drug is approved under the standard FDA protocol is 0.000625.
The probability that a placebo drug is approved under the modernized FDA protocol is 0.005.
The probability that a placebo drug is approved under the high-discretion accelerated FDA protocol is 0.0494.
The typical cost of a Phase III clinical trial is estimated to be $50 million.

Quotes

"Clearly, the effectiveness of a statistical protocol depends on the incentives of the agents."
"Regulators, on the other hand, have a mandate to set up a trustworthy system that not only performs valid statistical inference but also delivers high social utility."
"By formalizing the bet the researcher is already taking, the regulator establishes an economic basis for statistical inference."

Key Insights Distilled From

by Stephen Bate... at **arxiv.org** 04-17-2024

Deeper Inquiries

To refine the regulator's statistical protocol to account for the agent's uncertainty about the true quality of their product, the protocol can incorporate Bayesian decision-making principles. By using Bayesian inference, the regulator can update their beliefs about the agent's product quality based on the evidence provided in the trials. This approach allows for a more nuanced understanding of the uncertainty surrounding the product's efficacy and can lead to more informed decision-making.
Specifically, the regulator can use prior distributions that capture the range of possible product qualities and update these distributions based on the results of the trials. By incorporating Bayesian updating, the regulator can make decisions that are more adaptive to the evolving evidence and the agent's behavior. This refinement allows for a more dynamic and responsive statistical protocol that takes into account the agent's uncertainty and adjusts the standards of evidence accordingly.

Implementing an incentive-aligned statistical contract may have potential drawbacks and unintended consequences that need to be carefully considered and mitigated. Some of these drawbacks include:
Reduced Innovation: Stricter statistical protocols may deter companies from pursuing innovative but risky treatments, as the high standards of evidence could make it financially unfeasible to bring such treatments to market. This could stifle innovation in the industry.
Increased Costs: Stricter protocols may lead to higher costs for companies, as they may need to conduct more trials or gather more evidence to meet the standards. This could result in increased financial burdens on companies and potentially higher drug prices for consumers.
False Negatives: Overly strict protocols could result in effective treatments being rejected due to insufficient evidence, leading to missed opportunities for beneficial therapies to reach the market.
To mitigate these potential drawbacks, regulators can consider the following strategies:
Flexibility: Designing protocols that allow for flexibility in evidence requirements based on the nature of the treatment and the level of risk involved.
Risk-Based Approaches: Implementing risk-based approaches that tailor the evidence requirements to the level of risk associated with the treatment, allowing for more leniency in cases where the potential benefits outweigh the risks.
Transparency: Ensuring transparency in the decision-making process and providing clear guidelines to companies on the evidence required for approval, helping them make informed decisions about pursuing trials.

The insights from this work can be applied to other regulatory settings beyond the FDA where strategic agents interact with a principal based on statistical evidence. For example:
Financial Regulation: In the financial sector, regulators could use incentive-aligned statistical contracts to evaluate the riskiness of financial products and ensure that financial institutions are not incentivized to take excessive risks.
Environmental Regulation: Environmental regulators could use similar principles to design protocols that incentivize companies to provide accurate data on the environmental impact of their activities, ensuring compliance with regulations and promoting sustainability.
Telecommunications Regulation: Regulators in the telecommunications industry could apply these insights to assess the quality of services provided by telecom companies and incentivize them to meet certain standards of service quality.
By incorporating incentive-aligned statistical contracts and considering the strategic behavior of agents, regulators in various industries can design more effective and efficient protocols for decision-making based on statistical evidence.

0