Phase I (or phase II) dose-ranging clinical trials: Proposal of a two-stage Bayesian design

Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 87-101

  Zohar, Sarah ^a   Chevret, Sylvie ^a  

^a SAINT LOUIS HOSPITAL   (France)

Author keywords

Bayesian inference; Clinical trial; Continual reassessment method; Phase I or II; Stopping rules

Indexed keywords

DRUG;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; DOSE CALCULATION; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG SAFETY; METHODOLOGY; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TOXICITY TESTING;

BAYES THEOREM; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; MIDAZOLAM; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS;

EID: 0037285195     PISSN: 10543406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1081/BIP-120017728     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Ahn, C. (1998). An evaluation of phase I cancer clinical trial designs. Stat. Med. 17:1537-1549.
2. Berry, D. A. (1989). Monitoring accumulating data in a clinical trial. Biometrics 45:1197-1211.
3. Berry, D. A. (1995). Decision analysis and Bayesian methods in clinical trials. Cancer Treat. Res. 75:125-154.
4. Chevret, S. (1993). The continual reassessment method in cancer phase I clinical trials: a simulation study. Stat. Med. 12:1093-1108.
5. Dougherty, T. B., Porche, V. H., Thall, P. F. (2000). Maximum tolerated dose of nalmefene in patients receiving epidural fentanyl and dilute bupivacaine for postoperative analgesia. Anesthesiology 92:1010-1016.
6. Fabre, E., Chevret, S., Piechaud, J. F., Rey, E., Vauzelle-Kervoedan, F., D'Athis, P., Olive, G., Pons, G. (1998). An approach for dose finding of drugs in infants: sedation by midazolam studied using the continual reassessment method. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 46:395-401.
7. Faries, D. (1994). Practical modifications of the continual reassessment method for phase I cancer clinical trials. J. Biopharm. Stat. 4:147-164.
8. Goodman, S. N., Zahurak, M. L., Piantadosi, S. (1995). Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat. Med. 14:1149-1161.
9. Korn, E. L., Midthune, D., Chen, T. T., Rubinstein, L. V., Christian, M. C., Simon, R. M. (1994). A comparison of two phase I trial designs. Stat. Med. 13:1799-1806.
10. Moller, S. (1995). An extension of the continual reassessment methods using a preliminary up-and-down design in a dose finding study in cancer patients, in order to investigate a greater range of doses. Stat. Med. 14:911-922, discussion 923.
11. O'Quigley, J., Chevret, S. (1991). Methods for dose finding studies in cancer clinical trials: a review and results of a Monte Carlo study. Stat. Med. 10:1647-1664.
12. O'Quigley, J., Reiner, E. A. (1998). Stopping rule for the continual reassessment method. Biometrika 85:741-748.
13. O'Quigley, J., Shen, L. Z. (1996). Continual reassessment method: a likelihood approach. Biometrics 52:673-684.
14. O'Quigley, J., Pepe, M., Fisher, L. (1990). Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 46:33-48.
15. Senn, S. (1997). Dose-finding. Statistical Issues in Drug Development. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 275-290.
16. Thall, P. F., Russell, K. E. (1998). A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes in phase I/II clinical trials. Biometrics 54:251-264.
17. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal products. (2001) Note for guidance on evaluation of anticancer medicinal products in man. Technical report, London, May 2001.
18. Zohar, S., Chevret, S. (2001). The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies. Stat. Med. 20:2827-2843.