Phase I design for completely or partially ordered treatment schedules

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 569-579

  Wages, Nolan A ^a   O'Quigley, John ^b   Conaway, Mark R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^b SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Continual reassessment method; Dose finding studies; Maximum tolerated dose; Partial ordering; Phase I trials; Treatment schedules

Indexed keywords

AURORA KINASE INHIBITOR; MSC 1992371A; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; DOSE LIMITNG TOXICITY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG ADMINISTRATION; DRUG DOSE ESCALATION; DRUG DOSE REGIMEN; DRUG TOXICITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROME; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRESCRIPTION; PROBABILITY; SIMULATION; STUDY DESIGN; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

CONTINUAL REASSESSMENT METHOD; DOSE-FINDING STUDIES; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; PARTIAL ORDERING; PHASE I TRIALS; TREATMENT SCHEDULES;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MYELODYSPLASTIC SYNDROMES; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84892487228     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5998     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Braun TM, Yuan Z, Thall PF. Determining a maximum-tolerated schedule of a cytotoxic agent. Biometrics 2005; 61:335-343.
2. Braun TM, Thall PF, Nguyen H, Lima M. Simultaneously optimizing dose and schedule of a new cytotoxic agent. Clinical Trials 2007; 4:113-124.
3. Li Y, Bekele B, Ji Y, Cook J. Dose-schedule finding in Phase I/II clinical trials using a bayesian isotonic transformation. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:4895-4913.
4. Wages NA, Conaway MR, O'Quigley J. Continual reassessment method for partial ordering. Biometrics 2011; 67:1555-1563.
5. O'Quigley J, Paoletti X, Maccario J. Non-parametric optimal design in dose finding studies. Biostatistics 2002; 3(1): 51-56.
6. Paoletti X, O'Quigley J, Maccario J. Design efficiency in dose finding studies. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 2004; 45(2): 197-214.
7. O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 1990; 46:33-48.
8. de Lima M, Giralt S, Thall PF, de Padua Silva L, Jones RB, Komandur K, Braun TM, Nguyen HQ, Champlin R, Garcia-Manero G. Maintenance therapy with low-dose azacitidine after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for recurrent acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome: a dose and schedule finding study. Cancer 2011; 116:5420-5431.
9. Wages NA, Conaway MR. Specifications of a continual reassessment method for phase I trials of combined drugs. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2013; 12:217-224.
10. Graux C, Sonet A, Maertens J, Duyster J, Greiner J, Chalandon Y, Martinelli G, Hess D, Heim D, Giles FJ, Kelly KR, Gianella-Borradori A, Longerey B, Asatiani E, Rejeb N, Ottman OG. A phase I dose-escalation study of MSC1992371A, an oral inhibitor of aurora andother kinases, in advanced hematologic malignancies. Leukemia Research 2013; 37:1100-1106.
11. Hwang J, Peddada S. Confidence interval estimation subject to order restrictions. Annals of Statistics 1994; 22:67-93.
12. Wages NA, Conaway MR, O'Quigley J. Dose-finding design for multi-drug combinations. Clinical Trials 2011; 8:380-389.
13. Lee SM, Cheung YK. Model calibration in the continual reassessment method. Clinical Trials 2009; 6(3): 227-238.