Bayesian dose-finding in phase I/II clinical trials using toxicity and efficacy odds ratios

Biometrics

Volumn 62, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 777-787

  Yin, Guosheng ^a   Li, Yisheng ^a   Ji, Yuan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian adaptive design; Bivariate binary model; Equivalence contour; Gibbs sampling; Trade offs

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; DRUG DOSAGE; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ONCOLOGY; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS;

ADAPTIVE DESIGNS; BAYESIAN; BAYESIAN ADAPTIVE DESIGN; BINARY MODELS; BIVARIATE; BIVARIATE BINARY MODEL; EQUIVALENCE CONTOUR; GIBBS SAMPLING; ODD RATIOS; TRADE OFF;

TOXICITY;

DOCETAXEL; EVEROLIMUS;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; LOGIT ANALYSIS; PROBABILITY; SIMULATION; TOXICITY;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOMETRY; BREAST CANCER; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DOSE CALCULATION; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; HEMATOLOGIC DISEASE; HUMAN; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; METASTASIS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SIMULATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33748795036     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: 15410420     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2006.00534.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bekele, B. N. and Shen, Y. (2005). A Bayesian approach to jointly modeling toxicity and biomarker expression in a phase I/II dose-finding trial. Biometrics 61, 343-354.
2. Braun, T. M. (2002). The bivariate continual reassessment method: Extending the CRM to phase I trials of two competing outcomes. Controlled Clinical Trials 23, 240-256.
3. Cheung, Y. K. (2002). On the use of nonparametric curves in phase I trials with low toxicity tolerance. Biometrics 58, 237-240.
4. Dale, J. R. (1986). Global cross-ratio models for bivariate, discrete, ordered responses. Biometrics 42, 909-917.
5. Gasparini, M. and Eisele, J. (2000). A curve-free method for phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 56, 609-615.
6. Gilks, W. R., Best, N. G., and Tan, K. K. C. (1995). Adaptive rejection Metropolis sampling within Gibbs sampling. Applied Statistics 44, 455-472.
7. Goodman, S. N., Zahurak, M. L., and Piantadosi, S. (1995). Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Statistics in Medicine 14, 1149-1161.
8. Gooley, T. A., Martin, P. J., Fisher, L. D., and Pettinger, M. (1994). Simulation as a design tool for phase I/II clinical trials: An example from bone marrow transplantation. Controlled Clinical Trials 15, 450-462.
9. Ivanova, A. (2003). A new dose-finding design for bivariate outcomes. Biometrics 59, 1001-1007.
10. Korn, E. L., Midthune, D., Chen, T. T., Rubinstein, L. V., Christian, M. C., and Simon, R. M. (1994). A comparison of two phase I trial designs. Statistics in Medicine 13, 1799-1806.
11. Leung, D. H.-Y. and Wang, Y.-G. (2002). An extension of the continual reassessment method using decision theory. Statistics in Medicine 21, 51-63.
12. Møller, 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. Statistics in Medicine 14, 911-922.
13. Mukhopadhyay, S. (2000). Bayesian nonparametric inference on the dose level with specified response rate. Biometrics 56, 220-226.
14. Murtaugh, P. A. and Fisher, L. D. (1990). Bivariate binary models of efficacy and toxicity in dose-ranging trials. Communications in Statistics, Part A - Theory and Methods 19, 2003-2020.
15. O'Quigley, J. and Shen, L. Z. (1996). Continual reassessment method: A likelihood approach. Biometrics 52, 673-684.
16. O'Quigley, J., Pepe, M., and Fisher, L. (1990). Continual reassessment method: A practical design for phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 46, 33-48.
17. O'Quigley, J., Hughes, M. D., and Fenton, T. (2001). Dose-finding designs for HIV studies. Biometrics 57, 1018-1029.
18. Storer, B. E. (1989). Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 45, 925-937.
19. Thall, P. F. and Cheng, S.-C. (1999). Treatment comparisons based on two-dimensional safety and efficacy alternatives in oncology trials. Biometrics 55, 746-753.
20. Thall, P. F. and Cook, J. (2004). Dose-finding based on toxicity-efficacy trade-offs. Biometrics 60, 684-693.
21. Thall, P. F. and 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.