×
In the world of clinical research, the choice of statistical software is pivotal. SAS (Statistical Analysis System) and R stand out as two of the leading tools, each with its unique strengths and capabilities. Here we will attempt to delve into the differences between SAS and R and unpacks their respective advantages in clinical research.
SAS: Developed by the SAS Institute in the 1970s, SAS has been a standard in clinical research for decades. It is a powerful, closed-source software suite that excels in data analysis, report writing, and statistical modeling. Its reliability and comprehensive support services have made it the go-to choice for many pharmaceutical companies and regulatory agencies.
R: R is an open-source programming language and environment that emerged in the 1990s, gaining popularity for its statistical computing and graphics capabilities. R is supported by a vibrant community of statisticians and programmers who contribute packages, offering a wide range of tools for various statistical analyses.
SAS: Being proprietary software, SAS requires a paid license, which can be expensive, limiting access for individuals or small organizations.
R: As open-source software, R is freely available to anyone. This has democratized access to advanced statistical tools.
SAS: Offers professional and comprehensive support through its customer service and dedicated resources. The user base, while smaller than R's, consists largely of professionals within industry and academia.
R: Benefits from a large, active community. Users can rely on an abundance of free resources, forums, and groups for support. However, the decentralized nature of the community means support quality can vary.
SAS: Provides a traditional, menu-driven interface that some users may find more accessible initially. The learning curve can be steep, but it is often considered easier for non-programmers.
R: R is primarily a command-line driven programming language but it has several Graphical User Interface (GUI) options that enhance user experience, making it more accessible to those less comfortable with command-line interfaces or those who appreciate a more visual approach to programming. The most well-known GUI for R is RStudio. However, there are other GUIs available:
1. RStudio is an integrated development environment (IDE) for R. It provides a user-friendly interface that includes a console, syntax-highlighting editor that supports direct code execution, and tools for plotting, history, debugging, and workspace management.
2. Jupyter Notebooks: While not exclusive to R, Jupyter Notebooks support R kernels and allow users to write and run R code in an interactive document that can include code, narrative text, equations, and visualizations.
3. RKWard: An easy-to-use, extensible IDE/GUI for R that aims to combine the power of the R language with the ease of use of commercial statistical packages. It provides a wide range of statistical functions, even more through integration with the 'Rcmdr' and 'JGR' R packages.
4. R Commander (Rcmdr): R Commander is a basic-statistics GUI for R designed to be accessible to non-technical users. It provides dialog boxes to R functions for general data manipulation, analysis, and visualization.
5. Jamovi: Although technically not a GUI for R, Jamovi is a free and open statistical software built on top of the R statistical framework. Jamovi can run many analyses that R can but with an interface reminiscent of proprietary statistical software like SPSS.
6. BlueSky Statistics: An open-source GUI for R that works similarly to SPSS or SAS, providing a user-friendly way to interact with R via a spreadsheet interface and drop-down menus.
1. Shiny: Shiny is an R package that makes it easy to build interactive web apps straight from R. While it's more about sharing results than doing analyses, you can build a GUI for your R scripts using Shiny.
2. Esquisse: The 'Esquisse' R package allows you to create interactive drag'n' drop plots with ggplot2 with a GUI directly within the R environment. This can significantly simplify the creation of complex plots.
3. Each GUI has its strengths and is suited for different types of R users or specific tasks. Users may choose a GUI based on their personal preferences, the complexity of the statistical analysis they aim to undertake, or the requirement of their teaching or research environment. RStudio, given its comprehensive features and wide adoption, remains the most popular choice for many R programmers.
SAS: Excelling in handling large datasets, SAS is optimized for enterprise-level data processing and analysis. Its robustness and speed in data handling are particularly noted in clinical trials.
R: While R can sometimes be slower with very large datasets, it offers unparalleled analytical power due to the sheer volume of packages available for diverse statistical analyses.
• Regulatory Acceptance: SAS has a long history of being the standard in clinical research, partly due to its widespread acceptance by regulatory bodies like the FDA. Its reliability and comprehensive documentation make it a safe choice for submitting clinical trial data.
• Industry Standard: Given its dominance in the pharmaceutical industry, proficiency in SAS is often required, making it advantageous for professionals seeking careers in this field.
• Data Management: SAS's ability to handle large datasets and its suite of tools for data manipulation and cleaning are invaluable in clinical research where data integrity is paramount.
• FDA’s Data Standards Catalog
• Flexibility and Innovation: The open-source nature of R encourages innovation, with researchers constantly developing new packages for cutting-edge statistical methods. This flexibility is crucial for advancing methodological approaches in clinical research.
• Cost-Effectiveness: For startups, academic researchers, and lower-income countries, R’s lack of licensing fees offers an accessible, powerful tool for complex statistical analysis.
• Graphics and Reporting: R is renowned for its advanced graphical capabilities, enabling the creation of publication-quality graphs and reports. This is particularly useful for visualizing clinical trial data and results.
• Community Support: R’s vast community provides a wealth of resources, including specialized packages for clinical research, such as Survival analysis, Longitudinal data analysis, and Bioconductor for genomic data.
The distinct strengths of SAS and R indicate that an integration of both could provide a formidable setup for clinical research. Researchers may opt to prepare and manage data within the robust SAS environment due to its performance with large datasets and then switch to R for advanced statistical analyses and graphic representations that are not readily available in SAS.
With the clinical research landscape growing in complexity, interoperability between tools has become more critical. SAS now offers ways to call R from within a SAS session, and R can likewise interface with SAS datasets, allowing for a seamless workflow that takes advantage of both the data handling power of SAS and the analytical flexibility of R.
As we look forward, the convergence of tools like SAS and R, along with advancements in data science and bioinformatics, is likely to redefine the capabilities in clinical research. Cloud computing, machine learning, and real-time analytics are pushing the boundaries further, necessitating a broad skill set and familiarity with multiple platforms.
Given the distinct advantages of both SAS and R, a well-rounded education in both platforms might become more commonly recommended or even required for new professionals entering the field. Universities and training programs may increasingly integrate both SAS and R into their curricula to prepare students for the diverse research landscape.
• Educational Programs Incorporating SAS and R
In practice, the choice between SAS and R can be influenced by personal preference, organizational culture, or the specific demands of a given project.
• Regulatory Submission: For clinical trials that involve regulatory submissions to agencies such as the FDA, the use of SAS is often non-negotiable.
• Investment in Training: Organizations must consider the training investment required for staff. While R has a steeper learning curve, it may offer long-term benefits due to its flexibility and cost savings.
• Collaborations and Partnerships: Collaborating entities may dictate the software choice. Academic institutions might prefer R, while industry partners might lean towards SAS.
• Career Goals: As a professional, aligning with industry standards can be crucial, making SAS an important skillset for those focused on a career in the pharmaceutical industry.
• Specialization: Those specializing in data visualization, machine learning, or advanced statistical modeling may find R's environment and community support more conducive to their work.
• Project Needs: The scale and complexity of the data, as well as the types of analyses required, will influence the choice.
Embracing both SAS and R not only expands the toolkit available to the researcher but also aligns with an industry that increasingly values multidisciplinary and collaborative approaches. Teams that are proficient in both can tackle a wider array of challenges and contribute to a more innovative scientific community.
Choosing between SAS and R in clinical research depends on multiple factors, including the specific needs of the project, budget constraints, and personal or organizational expertise. SAS offers unparalleled reliability and is often required for regulatory submissions, making it essential in certain clinical research contexts. R, on the other hand, shines in its flexibility, cost-effectiveness, and the innovative spirit of its community.
Clinical research, with its stringent requirements and the need for high-quality, reproducible results, benefits immensely from the strengths of both SAS and R. While the former supports data management and regulatory compliance, the latter offers cutting-edge analytical techniques and sophisticated data visualization.
The ongoing digital transformation in healthcare continues to blur the lines, calling for a strategic blend of stability and innovation—qualities embodied by SAS and R, respectively. As modern clinical research continues to evolve, the dialogue between these two powerhouses will shape the future of data analysis in healthcare.
Choosing where to invest time and resources—be it in SAS, R, or both—is a decision that should be personalized to the context of the clinical research, the needs of the stakeholders involved, and the long-term vision of the field itself.
By understanding the unique contributions and potentials of both SAS and R, clinical research can continue to advance, delivering insights with precision and driving innovations that ultimately improve human health.
