Small-sample behavior of novel phase i cancer trial designs

Clinical Trials

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 63-80

  Oron, Assaf P ^a,b   Hoff, Peter D ^b  

^a SEATTLE CHILDREN S RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; DOSE CALCULATION; DRUG TOXICITY; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PUBLICATION; STUDY DESIGN;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BAYES THEOREM; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; NEOPLASMS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84872858984     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774512469311     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: A practical design for phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics. 1990 ; 46 (1). 33-48
2. Babb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S. Cancer phase I clinical trials: Efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat Med. 1998 ; 17: 1103-20
3. Leung DHY, Wang YG. Isotonic designs for phase I trials. Control Clin Trials. 2001 ; 22 (2). 126-38
4. Yuan Z, Chappell R. Isotonic designs for phase I cancer clinical trials with multiple risk groups. Clin Trials. 2004 ; 1 (6). 499-508
5. Ivanova A, Flournoy N, Chung Y. Cumulative cohort design for dose-finding. J Stat Plan Inference. 2007 ; 137: 2316-27
6. Carter SK The Design of Clinical Trials in Cancer Therapy. Staquet MJ, ed. Brussels: Editions Scientific Europe ; 1973: 242-89.
7. Storer BE. Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials. Biometrics. 1989 ; 45 (3). 925-37
8. Reiner E, Paoletti X, O'Quigley J. Operating characteristics of the standard phase I clinical trial design. Comput Stat Data An. 1999 ; 30: 303-15
9. Lin Y, Shih WJ. Statistical properties of the traditional algorithm-based designs for phase I cancer clinical trials. Biostatistics. 2001 ; 2 (2). 203-15
10. Rogatko A, Schoeneck D, Jonas W, et al. Translation of innovative designs into phase I trials. J Clin Oncol. 2007 ; 25 (31). 4982-86
11. Ivy SP, Siu LL, Garrett-Mayer E, Rubinstein L. Approaches to phase 1 clinical trial design focused on safety, efficiency, and selected patient populations: A report from the clinical trial design task force of the National Cancer Institute Investigational Drug Steering Committee. Clin Cancer Res. 2010 ; 16 (6). 1726-36
12. Shen LZ, O'Quigley J. Consistency of continual reassessment method under model misspecification. Biometrika. 1996 ; 83 (2). 395-405
13. Cheung YK, Chappell R. A simple technique to evaluate model sensitivity in the continual reassessment method. Biometrics. 2002 ; 58 (3). 671-74
14. Lee SM, Cheung YK. Model calibration in the continual reassessment method. Clin Trials. 2009 ; 6: 227-38
15. Oron AP, Azriel D, Hoff PD. Dose-finding designs: The role of convergence properties. Int J Biostat. 2011 ; 7 (1). 39
16. Azriel D. A note on the robustness of the continual reassessment method. Stat Probab Lett. 2012 ; 82: 902-06
17. Azriel D, Mandel M, Rinott Y. The treatment versus experimentation dilemma in dose finding studies. J Stat Plan Inference. 2011 ; 141 (8). 2759-68
18. Neuenschwander B, Branson M, Gsponer T. Critical aspects of the Bayesian approach to phase I cancer trials. Stat Med. 2008 ; 27: 2420-39
19. Resche-Rigon M, Zohar S, Chevret S. Adaptive designs for dose-finding in non-cancer phase II trials: Influence of early unexpected outcomes. Clin Trials. 2008 ; 5: 595-606
20. Zohar S, Resche-Rigon M, Chevret S. Using the continual reassessment method to estimate the minimum effective dose in phase II dose-finding studies: A case study. Clin Trials. 2011 ;:
21. Iasonos A, Wilton AS, Riedel ER, Seshan VE, Spriggs DR. A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3+3 dose escalation scheme in phase I dose-finding studies. Clin Trials. 2008 ; 5: 465-77
22. Chevret S. The continual reassessment method in cancer phase I clinical trials: A simulation study. Stat Med. 1993 ; 12: 1093-108
23. O'Quigley J, Zohar S. Experimental designs for phase I and phase I/II dose-finding studies. Br J Cancer. 2006 ; 94 (5). 609-13
24. FedorovVVFlournoyNWuYZhangR. Best intention designs in dose-finding studies. Cambridge: Isaac Newton Institute for the Mathematical Sciences, 2011. Available at: http://www.newton.ac.uk/preprints/NI11065.pdf
25. Whitehead J, Brunier H. Bayesian decision procedures for dose determining experiments. Stat Med. 1995 ; 14: 885-93
26. Whitehead J, Patterson S, Webber D, Francis S, Zhou Y. Easy-to-implement Bayesian methods for dose-escalation studies in healthy volunteers. Biostatistics. 2001 ; 2: 47-61
27. Flinn IW, Goodman SN, Post L, et al. A dose-finding study of liposomal daunorubicin with CVP (COP-X) in advanced NHL. Ann Oncol. 2000 ; 11: 691-95
28. Dougherty TB, Porche VH, Thall PF. Maximum tolerated dose of nalmefene in patients receiving epidural fentanyl and dilute bupivacaine for postoperative analgesia. Anesthesiology. 2000 ; 92: 1010-16
29. Goodman SN, Zahurak ML, Piantadosi S. Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med. 1995 ; 14: 1149-61
30. Pisters PW, Patel SR, Prieto VG, et al. Phase I trial of preoperative doxorubicin-based concurrent chemoradiation and surgical resection for localized extremity and body wall soft tissue sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 2004 ; 22 (16). 3375-80
31. Mathew P, Thall PF, Jones D, et al. Platelet-derived growth factor receptor inhibitor imatinib mesylate and docetaxel: A modular phase I trial in androgen-independent prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004 ; 22 (16). 3323-29
32. Cheung YK. Coherence principles in dose-finding studies. Biometrika. 2005 ; 92 (4). 863-73
33. Lindley DV. Theory and practice of Bayesian statistics. Statistician. 1983 ; 32: 1-11
34. Dixon WJ, Mood AM. A method for obtaining and analyzing sensitivity data. J Am Stat Assoc. 1948 ; 43: 109-26
35. Derman C. Non-parametric up-and-down experimentation. Ann Math Stat. 1957 ; 28: 795-98
36. Tsutakawa RK. Random walk design in bio-assay. J Am Stat Assoc. 1967 ; 62: 842-56
37. Durham SD, Flournoy N Adaptive Designs. Flournoy N Rosenberger WF, ed. Hayward, CA: Institute of Mathematical Statistics ; 1995: 139-57.
38. Gezmu M The Geometric Up-and-Down Design for Allocating Dosage Levels. Washington, DC: American University ; 1996 :
39. Stylianou M, Flournoy N. Dose finding using the biased coin up-and-down design and isotonic regression. Biometrics. 2002 ; 58 (1). 171-77
40. Ivanova A, Haghighi AA, Mohanty SG, Durham SD. Improved up-and-down designs for phase I trials. Stat Med. 2003 ; 22: 69-82
41. Oron AP, Hoff PD. The k-in-a-row up-and-down design, revisited. Stat Med. 2009 ; 28: 1805-20
42. Gezmu M, Flournoy N. Group up-and-down designs for dose-finding. J Stat Plan Inference. 2006 ; 136 (6). 1749-64
43. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Development Core Team ; 2011 :
44. OronAP. Up-and-Down and the Percentile-Finding Problem. University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 2007, Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.3004
45. Cheung YK Dose Finding by the Continual Reassessment Method. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC ; 2011 :
46. O'Quigley J. Theoretical study of the continual reassessment method. J Stat Plan Inference. 2006 ; 136: 1765-80
47. Zohar S, Chevret S. The continual reassessment method: Comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies. Stat Med. 2003 ; 20: 2827-43
48. O'Quigley J, Paoletti X, Maccario J. Design efficiency in dose finding studies. Biostatistics. 2002 ; 3: 51-56
49. Paoletti X, O'Quigley J, Maccario J. Design efficiency in dose finding studies. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2004 ; 45: 197-214
50. Ji Y, Li Y, Bekele BN. Dose-finding in phase I clinical trials based on toxicity probability intervals. Clin Trials. 2007 ; 4 (3). 235-44
51. Ji Y, Li Y, Bekele BN. A modified toxicity probability interval method for dose-finding trials. Clin Trials. 2007 ; 7: 653-63
52. Yin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method in phase I clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc. 2009 ; 104: 954-68
53. Bartroff J, Lai TL. Approximate dynamic programming and its applications to the design of phase I cancer trials. Stat Sci. 2010 ; 25: 245-57
54. Pace NL, Stylianou MP. Advances in and limitations of up-and-down methodology: A précis of clinical use, study design, and dose estimation in anesthesia research. Anesthesiology. 2007 ; 107 (1). 144-52
55. O'Quigley J, Chevret S. Methods for dose finding studies in cancer clinical trials - A review of a Monte-Carlo study. Stat Med. 1991 ; 10 (11). 1647-64
56. Storer BE. An evaluation of Phase I clinical trial designs in the continuous dose-response setting. Stat Med. 2001 ; 20: 2399-408
57. Wald A. Sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. Ann Math Stat. 1945 ; 16 (2). 117-86