Continuous toxicity monitoring in phase II trials in oncology

Biometrics

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 540-545

  Ivanova, Anastasia ^a   Qaqish, Bahjat F ^a   Schell, Michael J ^a  

^a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

Author keywords

Phase II trial; Pocock boundary; Sequential monitoring; Unbiased estimate

Indexed keywords

ONCOLOGY;

CONTINUOUS TOXICITY MONITORING; IN-PHASE; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; PHASE I; PHASE II; PHASE II TRIAL; POCOCK BOUNDARY; SEQUENTIAL MONITORING; STOPPING RULE; UNBIASED ESTIMATES;

TOXICITY;

FLOXURIDINE; MITOXANTRONE; PACLITAXEL;

DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TOXICITY;

ANALYTIC METHOD; BAYES THEOREM; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CARDIOTOXICITY; CLINICAL TRIAL; HUMAN; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MONITORING; ONCOLOGY; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; REVIEW; SAMPLING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 20744440458     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00311.x     Document Type: Review

References (14)

1. Bryant, J. and Day, R. (1995). Incorporating toxicity considerations into the design of two-stage phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 51, 656-664.
2. Conaway, M. R. and Petroni, G. R. (1995). Bivariate sequential designs for phase II trials. Biometrics 51, 656-664.
3. Fletcher, R. (1987). Practical Methods of Optimization, 2nd edition. New York: Wiley.
4. Girshick, M. A., Mosteller, F., and Savege, L. J. (1946). Unbiased estimates for certain binomial sampling problems with applications. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 17, 13-23.
5. Jennison, C. and Turnbull, B. W. (2000). Group Sequential Methods with Applications to Clinical Trials. London, New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
6. Jung, S. H. and Kim, K. M. (2004). On the estimation of the binomial probability in multistage clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 23, 881-896.
7. Legedza, A. T. R. and Ibrahim, J. G. (2001). Heterogeneity in phase I clinical trials: Prior elicitation and computation using the continual reassessment method. Statistics in Medicine 20, 867-882.
8. Lindsey, J. K. (1997). Stopping rules and the likelihood function. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 59, 167-177.
9. Lin, P. Y. (2001). Phase II selection designs. In Handbook of Statistics in Clinical Oncology, J. Crowley (ed). 119-127. New York: Dekker.
10. Muggia, F. M., Liu, P. Y., Alberts, D. S., Wallace, D. L., O'Toole, R. V., Terada, K. Y., Franklin, E. W., Herrer, G. W., Goldberg, D. A., and Hannigan, E. V. (1996). Intraperitoneal mitoxantrone or floxuridine: Effects on time-to-failure and survival in patients with minimal residual ovarian cancer after second-look laparotoniy-A randomized phase II study by the Southwest Oncology Group. Gynecological Oncology 61, 395-402.
11. O'Brien, P. C. and Fleming, T. R. (1979). A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics 35, 549-556.
12. Pocock, S. J. (1977). Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika 64, 191-199.
13. Qaqish, B. F. (2003). A family of multivariate binary distributions for simulating correlated binary variables with specified marginal moans and correlations. Biometrika 90, 455-463.
14. Whitehead, J. (1986). Supplementary analysis at the conclusion of a sequential clinical trial. Biometrics 42, 461-471.