Phase I studies of chemotherapeutic agents in cancer patients: A review of the designs

Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics

Volumn 16, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 579-604

  Potter, Douglas M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Accelerated titration; Clinical trial; Continual reassessment method; Dose finding; Phase I

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG RESEARCH; DRUG TOLERABILITY; HUMAN; LETHAL DOSE; LOW DRUG DOSE; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MEDICAL ETHICS; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASMS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SOFTWARE;

EID: 33751559373     PISSN: 10543406     EISSN: 15205711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10543400600860295     Document Type: Review

References (82)

1. Ahn, C. (1998). An evaluation of Phase I cancer clinical trial designs. Stat. Med. 17:1537-1549.
2. Albert, A., Anderson, J. A. (1984). On the existence of maximum likelihood estimates in logistic regression. Biometrika 71:1-10.
3. Anbar, D. (1984). Stochastic approximation methods and their use in bioassay and Phase I clinical trials. Comm. Stat. 13:2451-2467.
4. Agrawal, M., Emanuel, E. J. (2003). Ethics of Phase I oncology studies: reexaming the arguments and data. JAMA 290(8):1075-1082.
5. Avecedo, P. V., Toppmeyer, D. L., Rubin, E. H. (2004). Phase I trial design and methodology for anticancer drugs. In: Teicher, B. A., Andrews, P. A., eds. Anticancer Drug Development Guide: Preclinical Screening, Clinical Trials, and Approval. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, pp. 351-362.
6. Babb, J. S., Rogatko, A. (2001). Patient specific dosing in a cancer Phase I clinical trial. Stat. Med. 20:2079-2090.
7. Babb, J., Rogatko, A., Zacks, S. (1998). Cancer Phase I clinical trials: efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat. Med. 17:1103-1120.
8. Boxenbaum, H., DiLea, C. (1995). First-time-in-human dose selection: allometric thoughts and perspectives. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 35:957-966.
9. Braun, T. M., Levine, J. E., Ferrara, J. L. M. (2003). Determining a tolerated cumulative dose: dose reassignment within the TITE-CRM. Control Clin. Trials 24:669-681.
10. Braun, T. M., Yuan, Z., Thall, P. F. (2005). Determining a maximum-tolerated schedule of a cytotoxic agent. Biometrics 61:335-343.
11. Cheung, Y. K. (2002). On the use of nonparametric curves in Phase I trials with low toxicity tolerance. Biometrics 58:237-240.
12. Cheung, Y. K., Chappell, R. (2000). Sequential designs for Phase I clinical trials with lateonset toxicities. Biometrics 56:1177-1182.
13. Chevret, S. (1993). The continual reassessment method in cancer Phase I clinical trials: a simulation study. Stat. Med. 12:1093-1108.
14. Conaway, M. R., Dunbar, S., Peddada, S. D. (2004). Designs for single- or multiple-agent Phase I trials. Biometrics 60:661-669.
15. Daugherty, C., Ratain, M. J., Grochowski, E., Stocking, C., Kodish, E., Mick, R., Siegler, M. (1995). Perceptions of cancer patients and their physicians involved in Phase I trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 13(5):1062-1072.
16. Dent, S. F., Eisenhauer, E. A. (1996). Phase I trial design: are new methodologies being put into practice? Ann. Onc. 7(6):561-566.
17. Dixon, W. J., Mood, A. M. (1948). A method for obtaining and analyzing sensitivity data. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 43:109-126.
18. Durham, S. D., Flournoy, N. (1994). Random walks for quantile estimation. In: Gupta, S. S., Berger, J. O., eds. Statistical Decision Theory and Related Topics V. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 467-476.
19. Durham, S. D., Flournoy, N., Rosenberger, W. F. (1997). A random walk rule for Phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 53:745-760.
20. Eisenhauer, E. A., O'Dwyer, P. J., Christian, M., Humphrey, J. S. (2000). Phase I clinical trial design in cancer drug development. J. Clin. Oncol. 18(3):684-692.
21. Faries, D. (1994). Practical modifications of the continual reassessment method for phase I cancer clinical trials. J. Biopharm. Stat. 4(2):147-164.
22. Finney, D. J. (1971). Statistical Method in Biological Assay. London: Charles Griffin.
23. Gasparini, M., Eisele, J. (2000). Curve-free method for Phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 56:609-615.
24. Goodman, S. N., Zahurak, M. L., Piantadose, S. (1995). Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for Phase I studies. Stat. Med. 14:1149-1161.
25. Greco, W. R., Bravo, G., Parsons, J. C. (1995). The search for synergy: a critical review from a response surface perspective. Pharmacol. Rev. 47(2):331-386.
26. Heyd, J. M., Carlin, B. P. (1999). Adaptive design improvements in the continual reassessment method for Phase I studies. Stat. Med. 18:1307-1321.
27. Horstmann, E., McCabe, M. S., Grochow, L., Yamamoto, S., Rubinstein, L., Budd, T., Shoemaker, D., Emanuel, E. J., Grady, C. (2005). Risks and benefits of Phase I oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N. Engl. J. Med. 352:895-904.
28. Hüsing, J., Sauerwein, W., Hideeghéty, K., Jöckel, K.-H. (2001). A scheme for a dose-escalation study when the event is lagged. Stat. Med. 20:3323-3334.
29. Ishizuka, N., Ohashi, Y. (2001). The continual reassessment method and its applications: a Bayesian methodology for Phase I cancer clinical trials. Stat. Med. 20:5661-2681.
30. Ivanova, A., Wang, K. (2004). A non-parametric approach to the design and analysis of two-dimensional dose-finding trials. Stat. Med. 23:1861-1870.
31. Ivanova, A., Montazer-Haghighi, A., Mohanty, S. G., Durham, S. D. (2003). Improved upand-down designs for Phase I trials. Stat. Med. 22:69-82.
32. Korn, E. L., Simon, R. (1993). Using the tolerable-dose diagram in the design of Phase I combination chemotherapy trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 11(4):794-801.
33. 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.
34. Korn, E. L., Midthune, D., Chen, T. T., Rubinstein, L. V., Christian, M. C., Simon, R. M. (1999). Commentary. Stat. Med. 18:2691-2692.
35. Legedza, A. T. R., Ibrahim, J. G. (2000). Longitudinal design for Phase I clinical trials using the continual reassessment method. Control Clin. Trials 21:574-588.
36. Legedza, A. T. R., Ibrahim, J. G. (2001). Heterogeneity in Phase I clinical trials: prior elicitation and computation using the continual reassessment method. Stat. Med. 20:867-882.
37. Leung, D. H.-Y., Wang, Y.-G. (2001). Isotonic designs for Phase I trials. Control Clin. Trials 22:126-138.
38. Leung, D. H.-Y., Wang, Y.-G. (2002). An extension of the continual reassessment method using decision theory. Stat. Med. 21:51-63.
39. Lin, Y., Shih, W. J. (2001). Statistical properties of the traditional algorithm-based designs for Phase I cancer clinical trials. Biostatistics 2(2):203-215.
40. Meropol, N. J., Weinfurt, K. P., Burnett, C. B., Balshem, A., Benson, A. B., Castel, L., Corbett, S., Diefenbach, M., Gaskin, D., Li, Y., Manne, S., Marshall, J., Rowland, J. H., Slater, E., Sulmasy, D. P., Echo, D. V., Washington, S., Schulman, K. A. (2003). Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding Phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication. J. Clin. Oncol. 21(13):2589-2596.
41. Mick, R., Ratain, M. J. (1993). Model-guided determination of maximum tolerated dose in Phase I clinical trials: evidence for increased precision. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 85(3):217-223.
42. 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. Stat. Med. 14:911-922.
43. Murphy, J. R., Hall, D. L. (1997). A logistic dose-ranging method for Phase I clinical investigators trials. J. Biopharm. Stat. 7(4):635-647.
44. O'Quigley, J. (1999). Another look at two Phase I clinical trial designs. Stat. Med. 18:2683-2690.
45. O'Quigley, J. (2002a). Continual reassessment designs with early termination. Biostatistics 3(1):87-99.
46. O'Quigley, J. (2002b). Curve-free and model-based continual reassessment method designs. Biometrics 58:245-249.
47. O'Quigley, J. (2005). Retrospective analysis of sequential dose-finding design. Biometrics 61:749-756.
48. O'Quigley, J., Chevret, S. (1996). Methods for dose finding studies in cancer clinical trials: a review and results of a Monte Carlo study. Stat. Med. 10:1647-1664.
49. O'Quigley, J., Paoletti, X. (2003). Continual reassessment method for ordered groups. Biometrics 59:430-440.
50. O'Quigley, J., Pepe, M., Fisher, L. (1990). Continual reassessment method: a practical design for Phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 46:33-48.
51. O'Quigley, J., Reiner, E. (1998). A stopping rule for the continual reassessment method. Biometrika 85(3):741-748.
52. O'Quigley, J., Shen, L. Z. (1996). Continual reassessment method: a likelihood approach. Biometrics 52:673-684.
53. Paul, R. K., Rosenberger, W. F., Flournoy, N. (2004). Quantile estimation following nonparametric Phase I clinical trials with ordinal response. Stat. Med. 23:2483-2495.
54. Piantadosi, S., Fisher, J. D., Grossman, S. (1998). Practical implementation of a modified continual reassessment method for dose-finding trials. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 41:429-436.
55. Piantadosi, S., Liu, G. (1996). Improved designs for dose escalation studies using pharmacokinetic measurements. Stat. Med. 15:1605-1618.
56. Potter, P. M. (2002). Adaptive dose finding for phase I clinical trials of drugs used for chemotherapy of cancer. Stat. Med. 21:1805-1823.
57. Ratain, J. J., Mick, R., Schilsky, R. L., Siegler, M. (1993). Statistical and ethical issues in the design and conduct of Phases I and II clinical trials of new anticancer agents. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 85(20):1637-1643.
58. Reiner, E., Paoletti, X., O'Quigley, J. (1999). Operating characteristics of the standard Phase I clinical trial design. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 30:303-315.
59. Robbins, H., Monroe, S. (1951). A stochastic approximation method. Ann. Math. Stat. 22:400-407.
60. Robertson, T., Wright, F. T., Dykstra, R. L. (1988). Order Restricted Inference. New York: Wiley.
61. Rosenberger, W. F. (1996). New directions in adaptive designs. Stat. Sci. 11(2):137-149.
62. Rosenberger, W. F., Haines, L. M. (2002). Competing designs for Phase I clinical trials: a review. Stat. Med. 21:2757-2770.
63. Santner, T. J., Duffy, D. E. (1986). A note on A. Albert and J. A. Anderson's conditions for the existence of maximum likelihood estimates in logistic regression models. Biometrika 73:755-758.
64. Shen, L. Z., O'Quigley, J. (1996). Consistency of continual reassessment method under model misspecification. Biometrika 83(2):395-405.
65. Simon, R., Freidlin, B., Rubinstein, L., Arbuck, S. G., Collins, J., Christian, M. C. (1997). Accelerated titration designs for Phase I clinical trials in oncology. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 89(15):1138-1147.
66. Smith, T. L., Lee, J. J., Kantarjian, H. M., Legha, S. S., Raber, M. N. (1996). Design and results of Phase I cancer clinical trials: three-year experience at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. J. Clin. Oncol. 14(1):287-295.
67. Storer, B. E. (1989). Design and analysis of Phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 45:925-937.
68. Storer, B. E. (2001). An evaluation of Phase I clinical trial designs in the continuous dose-response setting. Stat. Med. 20:2399-2408.
69. Stylianou, M., Follmann, D. A. (2004). The accelerated biased coin up-and-down design in Phase I trials. J Biopharm. Stat. 14(1):249-260.
70. Stylianou, M., Proschan, M., Flournoy, N. (2003). Estimating the probability of toxicity at the target dose following an up-and-down design. Stat. Med. 22:535-543.
71. Thall, P. F., Lee, J. J., Tseng, C.-H., Estey, E. H. (1999). Accrual strategies for Phase I trials with delayed patient outcome. Stat. Med. 18:1155-1169.
72. Thall, P. F., Millikan, R. E., Mueller, P., Lee, S.-J. (2003). Dose-finding with two agents in Phase I oncology trials. Biometrics 59:487-496.
73. Tighiouart, M., Rogatko, A., Babb, J. S. (2005). Flexible Bayesian methods for cancer Phase I clinical trials: dose escalation with overdose control. Stat. Med. 24:2183-2196.
74. Twelves, C. J., Thomson, C. S., Young, J. (1998). Entry into clinical trials in breast cancer: the importance of specialist teams. European Journal of Cancer 34:1004-1007.
75. Wang, O., Faries, D. E. (2000). A two-stage dose selection strategy in Phase I trials with wide dose ranges. J. Biopharm. Stat. 10(3):319-333.
76. Wetherill, G. B. (1963). Sequential estimation of quantal response curves. J. R. Stat. Soc. B27:1-48.
77. Whitehead, J., Brunier, H. (1995). Bayesian decision procedures for dose determining experiments. Stat. Med. 14:885-893.
78. Whitehead, J., Williamson, D. (1998). Bayesian decision procedures based on logistic regression models for dose-finding studies. J. Biopharm. Stat. 8(3):445-467.
79. Wu, C. F. J. (1985). Ef.cient sequential designs with binary data. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 80(392):974-984.
80. Zacks, S., Rogatko, A., Babb, J. (1998). Optimal Bayesian-feasible escalation for cancer Phase I trials. Stat. Probabil. Lett. 38:215-220.
81. Zohar, S., Chevret, S. (2001). The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies. Stat. Med. 20:2827-2843.
82. Zohar, S., Chevret, S. (2003). Phase I (or Phase II) dose-ranging clinical trials: proposal of a two-stage Bayesian design. J. Biopharm. Stat. 13(1):87-101.