A model-based approach in the estimation of the maximum tolerated dose in phase I cancer clinical trials

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 25, Issue 12, 2006, Pages 2027-2042

  He, Weili ^a   Liu, Jun ^b   Binkowitz, Bruce ^a   Quan, Hui ^a  

^a MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Dose limiting toxicity; Maximum tolerated dose; Model based approach; Traditional 3+3 designs; Traditional algorithm based designs

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ACUTE GRANULOCYTIC LEUKEMIA; ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKEMIA; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOSTATISTICS; CANCER RESEARCH; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; METHODOLOGY; OPEN STUDY; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ALGORITHMS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASMS;

EID: 33745453653     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.2334     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Green S, Benedetti J, Crowley J. Clinical Trials in Oncology. Chapman & Hall/CRC: London/Boca Raton, FL, 2003.
2. Smith T, Lee J, Kantarjian H, Legha S, Rober M. Design and results of phase I cancer clinical trials: three-year experience at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1996; 14(1):287-295.
3. Edler L. Overview of phase I trials. In Handbook of Statistics in Clinical Oncology, Crowley (ed.). Marcel Dekker: New York, 2001; 1-34.
4. O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase I clinical studies in cancer. Biometrics 1990; 46:33-48.
5. Durham S, Flournoy N, Rosenberger W. A random walk rule for phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 1997; 53:745-760.
6. Whitehead J, Brunier H. Bayesian decision procedures for dose determining experiments. Statistics in Medicine 1995; 14:885-893.
7. Whitehead J. Bayesian decision procedures with application to dose-finding studies. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Medicine 1997; 11:201-208.
8. Babb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S. Cancer phase I clinical trials: efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Statistics in Medicine 1998; 17:1103-1120.
9. Kang S, Ahn C. The expected toxicity rate at the maximum tolerated dose in the standard phase I cancer clinical trial design. Drug Information Journal 2001; 35:1189-1199.
10. Kang S, Ahn C. An investigation of the traditional algorithm-based designs for phase I cancer clinical trials. Drug Information Journal 2002; 36:865-873.
11. Lin Y, Shih WJ. Statistical properties of the traditional algorithm-based designs for phase I cancer clinical trials. Biostatistics 2001; 2(2):203-215.
12. Storer B, DeMets D. Current phase I/II designs: are they adequate? Journal of Clinical Research and Drug Development 1986; 1:121-130.
13. Venables W, Ripley B. Modern Applied Statistics with S-PLUS (2nd edn). Springer: Berlin, 1997.
14. Storer B. Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 1989; 45:925-937.
15. Rosenberger W, Haines L. Competing designs for phase I clinical trials: a review. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21:2757-2770.
16. Stylianou M, Proschan M, Flournoy N. Estimating the probability of toxicity at the target dose following an up-and-down design. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22:535-543.
17. O'Quigley J, Chevret S. Methods for dose finding studies in cancer trials: a review and results of a Monte Carlo study. Statistics in Medicine 1991; 10:1647-1664.
18. Korn E, Midthune D, Chen T, Rubinstein L, Christian M, Simon R. A comparison of two phase I trial designs. Statistics in Medicine 1994; 13:1799-1806.