Adaptive randomization to improve utility-based dose-finding with bivariate ordinal outcomes

Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 785-801

  Thall, Peter F ^a   Nguyen, Hoang Q ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Adaptive design; Bayesian design; Clinical trial; Dose finding; Epsilon greedy algorithm; Phase I II clinical trial; Utility

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE RANDOMIZATION; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIVARIATE ANALYSIS; BRAIN RADIATION; BRAIN STEM TUMOR; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE SEVERITY; DOSIMETRY; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; GLIOMA; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION INJURY; RANDOMIZATION; SAMPLE SIZE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; TOXICITY TESTING;

ALGORITHMS; BAYES THEOREM; BRAIN STEM NEOPLASMS; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II AS TOPIC; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, RADIATION; HUMANS; PONS; PONTINE GLIOMA; RADIOTHERAPY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SAMPLE SIZE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84863484374     PISSN: 10543406     EISSN: 15205711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10543406.2012.676586     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Babb, J., Rogatko, A., Zacks, S. (1998). Cancer phase I clinical trials: Efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Statistics in Medicine 17:1103-1120. (Pubitemid 28221028)
2. Bartroff, J., Lai, T. L. (2010). Approximate dynamic programming and its applications to the design of phase I cancer trials. Statistical Science 25:255-257.
3. Bekele, B. N., Shen, Y. (2004). A Bayesian approach to jointly modeling toxicity and biomarker expression in a phase I/II dose-finding trial. Biometrics 60:343-354.
4. Bekele, B. N., Thall, P. F. (2004). Dose-finding based on multiple toxicities in a soft tissue sarcoma trial. Journal of the American Statistical Association 99:26-35. (Pubitemid 38545191)
5. Berger, J. O. (1985). Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.
6. 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. (Pubitemid 34621206)
7. Braun, T. M., Thall, P. F., Nguyen, H., de Lima, M. (2007). Simultaneously optimizing dose and schedule of a new cytotoxic agent. Clinical Trials 4:113-124. (Pubitemid 46814847)
8. Dragalin, V., Fedorov, V. (2006). Adaptive designs for dose-finding based on efficacy- toxicity response. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 136:1800-1823. (Pubitemid 43193550)
9. Fowler, J. (1989). The linear-quadratic formula and progress in fractionated radiotherapy. British Journal of Radiology 62:679-694. (Pubitemid 19194494)
10. Haines, L. M., Perevozskaya, I., Rosenberger, W. F. (2003). Bayesian optimal design for phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 59:591-600. (Pubitemid 37093398)
11. Houede, N., Thall, P. F., Nguyen, H., Paoletti, X., Kramar, A. (2010). Utility-based optimization of combination therapy using ordinal toxicity and efficacy in phase I/II trials. Biometrics 66:532-540.
12. McCullagh, P. (1980). Regression models for ordinal data (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 42:109-142.
13. McCullagh, P., Nelder, J. A. (1989). Generalized Linear Models. 2nd ed. New York: Chapman and Hall.
14. Nelsen, R. B. (1999). An Introduction to Copulas. Lecture Notes in Statistics. Vol. 139. New York: Springer-Verlag.
15. O'Quigley, J., Hughes, M. D., Fenton, T. (2001). Dose-finding designs for HIV studies. Biometrics 57:1018-1029. (Pubitemid 33108092)
16. 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. (Pubitemid 20245604)
17. Robert, C. P., Cassella, G. (1999). Monte Carlo Statistical Methods. New York: Springer.
18. Sutton, R. S., Barto, A. G. (1998). Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Thall, P. F., Cook, J. D. (2004). Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics 60:684-693. (Pubitemid 39181113)
20. Thall, P. F., Russell, K. T. (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. (Pubitemid 28158800)
21. Thall, P. F., Nguyen, H. Q., Estey, E. H. (2008). Patient-specific dose-finding based on bivariate outcomes and covariates. Biometrics 64:1126-1136.
22. Thall, P. F., Szabo, A., Nguyen, H. Q., Amlie-Lefond, C. M., Zaidat, O. O. (2011). Optimizing the concentration and bolus of a drug delivered by continuous infusion. Biometrics 67:1638-1646.
23. Van Meter, E. M., Garrett-Mayer, E., Bandyopadhyay, D. (2011). Proportional odds model for dose-finding clinical trial designs with ordinal toxicity grading. Statistics in Medicine 30:2070-2080.
24. Yuan, Z., Chappell, R., Bailey, H. (2007). The continual reassessment method for multiple toxicity grades: A Bayesian quasi-likelihood approach. Biometrics 63:173-179.
25. Yuan, Y., Yin, G. (2009). Bayesian dose-finding by jointly modeling toxicity and efficacy as time-to-event outcomes. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series C 58:954-968.
26. Zhang, W., Sargent, D. J., Mandrekar, S. (2005). An adaptive dose-finding design incorporating both toxicity and efficacy. Statistics in Medicine 25:2365-2383. (Pubitemid 44057044)