A SAS-based solution to evaluate study design efficiency of phase I pediatric oncology trials via discrete event simulation

Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine

Volumn 90, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 240-250

  Barrett, Jeffrey S ^a,b   Jayaraman, Bhuvana ^a,b   Patel, Dimple ^a,b   Skolnik, Jeffrey M ^a,b  

^a CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical trial simulation; Discrete event simulation; Oncology phase I; SAS macro

Indexed keywords

DISCRETE EVENT SIMULATION; FREQUENCY RESPONSE; PEDIATRICS; PROBABILITY; TOXICITY;

CLINICAL TRIAL SIMULATION; ONCOLOGY PHASE I; SAS MACRO;

ONCOLOGY;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CHILDHOOD CANCER; COMPUTER SYSTEM; DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION; HUMAN; PATIENT SELECTION; PROBABILITY; SIMULATION; STOCHASTIC MODEL; VIRTUAL REALITY;

CHILD; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASMS; SOFTWARE; SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 42249096765     PISSN: 01692607     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2007.12.008     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Normolle D., and Lawrence T. Designing dose-escalation trials with late-onset toxicities using the time-to-event continual reassessment method. J. Clin. Oncol. 24 (2006) 4426-4433
2. Lee D.P., Skolnik J.M., and Adamson P.C. Pediatric phase I trials in oncology: an analysis of study conduct efficiency. J. Clin. Oncol. 23 (2005) 8431-8441
3. Heyd J.M., and Carlin B.P. Adaptive design improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat. Med. 18 (1999) 1307-1321
4. Fox E., Curt G.A., and Balis F.M. Clinical trial design for target-based therapy. Oncologist 7 (2002) 401-409
5. Barrett J.S., Patel D., Skolnik S., and Adamson P.C. Discrete event simulation (DES) as a Technique to study decision rule efficiency in event-driven clinical designs. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 46 (2006) 1092
6. J.M. Skolnik, J.S. Barrett, B. Jayaraman, D. Patel, P.C. Adamson, Shortening the timeline of pediatric phase I trials: the rolling six design, J. Clin. Oncol. 26 (2008) 190-195.
7. J.S. Barrett, J.M. Skolnik, B. Jayaraman, D. Patel, P.C. Adamson, Improving study design and conduct efficiency of event-driven clinical trials via discrete event simulation: application to pediatric oncology, Clin. Pharmacol. Ther., in press.
8. T.J. Schriber, D.T. Brunner, Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, in: Winter Simulation Conference, 1997.
9. K. Alden, SAS' Best Kept Secret: Macro Windows for Applications Development, http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi25/25/cc/25p076.pdf SUGI 25, Paper 76-25 (2000).
10. W. Bannister, Using %WINDOW to create Interactive and completely RE-usable code with SAS Base, http://www.valsug.org/Meetings/2004/jan/PctWindow_WadeBannister_v4.pdf Valsug Proceedings (2004).
11. N.A. Curtis, Are Histograms giving you Fits? New SAS software for analyzing distributions, http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/SAS/library/distributionanalysis.pdf WUSS Proceedings (1999) SAS Institute, Cary NC.
12. Braun T.M. Generalizing the TITE-CRM to adapt for early- and late-onset toxicities. Stat. Med. 25 (2006) 2071-2083
13. CDER, Innovation and stagnation: challenge and opportunity on the critical path to new medicinal products, US Food Drug Adm. (2004).
14. Barrett J.S., Gupta M., and Mondick J.T. Model-based Drug development for oncology agents. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 2 (2007) 185-209
15. Quaranta V., Weaver A.M., Cummings P.T., and Anderson A.R. Mathematical modeling of cancer: the future of prognosis and treatment. Clin. Chim. Acta 357 (2005) 173-179
16. Straetemans R., O'Brien T., Wouters L., Van Dun J., Janicot M., Bijnens L., Burzykowski T., and Aerts M. Design and analysis of drug combination experiments. Biom. J. 47 (2005) 299-308
17. Collins J.M., Grieshaber C.K., and Chabner B.A. Pharmacologically guided phase I clinical trials based upon preclinical drug development. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 82 (1990) 1321-1326
18. Groninger E., Proost J.H., and de Graaf S.S. Pharmacokinetic studies in children with cancer. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 52 (2004) 173-197
19. Michael M., Thompson M., Hicks R.J., Mitchell P.L., Ellis A., Milner A.D., Di Iulio J., Scott A.M., Gurtler V., Hoskins J.M., Clarke S.J., Tebbut N.C., Foo K., Jefford M., and Zalcberg J.R. Relationship of hepatic functional imaging to irinotecan pharmacokinetics and genetic parameters of drug elimination. J. Clin. Oncol. 24 (2006) 4228-4235
20. de Jonge M.E., Huitema A.D., Schellens J.H., Rodenhuis S., and Beijnen J.H. Individualised cancer chemotherapy: strategies and performance of prospective studies on therapeutic drug monitoring with dose adaptation: a review. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 44 (2005) 147-173
21. Davies S.M. Pharmacogenetics, pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine: are we there yet?. Hematol. Am. Soc. Hematol. Educ. Program (2006) 111-117
22. Goldbeck L. Familial coping with cancer in childhood and adolescence. Possibilities for standardized assessment with a self-assessment method: results of an empirical pilot study. Prax. Kinderpsychol. Kinderpsychiatr. 47 (1998) 552-573
23. Maitland M.L., DiRienzo A., and Ratain M.J. Interpreting disparate responses to cancer therapy: the role of human population genetics. J. Clin. Oncol. 24 (2006) 2151-2157
24. Chevret S. The continual reassessment method in cancer phase I clinical trials: a simulation study. Stat. Med. 12 (1993) 1093-1108
25. Garrett-Mayer E. The continual reassessment method for dose-finding studies: a tutorial. Clin. Trials 3 (2006) 57-71
26. Yuan Z., Chappell R., and Bailey H. The continual reassessment method for multiple toxicity grades: a Bayesian quasi-likelihood approach. Biometrics 63 (2007) 173-179
27. Swain J.J. Biennial software of discrete-event simulation software tools: new application areas fuel growth. OR/MS Today 34 (2007) 35-46
28. Kramar A., Houede N., and Paoletti X. np1: a computer program for dose escalation strategies in phase I clinical trials. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 88 (2007) 8-17