Extended model-based designs for more complex dose-finding studies

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 30, Issue 17, 2011, Pages 2062-2069

  O'Quigley, John ^a   Conaway, Mark ^b  

^a INSERM   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian model choice; Clinical trials; Continual reassessment method; Dose escalation; Dose finding studies; Extended models; Phase 1; Safety; Toxicity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; DOSE CALCULATION; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; PATIENT SELECTION; STUDY DESIGN;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BAYES THEOREM; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASMS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 79959937219     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.4024     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 1990; 46:33-48.
2. O'Quigley J, Shen L, Gamst A. Two sample continual reassessment method. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 1999; 9:17-44.
3. O'Quigley J, Paoletti X. Continual reassessment method for ordered groups. Biometrics 2003; 59:430-440.
4. Conaway M, Dunbar S, Peddada S. Designs for single-or multiple-agent phase I trials. Biometrics 2004; 45:661-669.
5. Patnaik A, Warner E, Michael M, Egorin M, Moore M, Siu L, Fracasso P, Rivkin S, Kerr I, Litchman M, Oza A. Phase I dose-finding and pharmokinetic study of paclitaxel and carboplatin with oral valspodar in patients with advanced solid tumors. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2000; 18:3677-3689.
6. Cheung YK, Chappell R. A simple technique to evaluate model sensitivity in the continual reassessment method. Biometrics 2002; 58:671-674.
7. O'Quigley J, Zohar S. Retrospective robustness of the continual reassessment method. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 20:1013-1025.
8. O'Quigley J, Shen LZ. Continual reassessment method: a likelihood approach. Biometrics 1996; 52:673-684.
9. Lee SM, Cheung YK. Model calibration in the continual reassessment method. Clinical Trials 2009; 6:227-238.
10. Yin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method in phase I clinical trials. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2009; 104:954-968.
11. Daimon S, Zohar S, O'Quigley, J. Bayesian adaptive model-selecting continual reassessment methods in phase I dose-finding clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine, DOI: 10.1002/sim.4054.
12. Gelfand A, Ghosh S. Model choice: a minimum posterior predictive loss approach. Biometrika 1998; 85:1-11.
13. Spiegelhalter D, Best N, Carlin B, van der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 2002; 64:583-639.
14. Kass RE, Raftery AE. Bayes factors and model uncertainty. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1995; 90:773-795.