Bayesian optimal interval design: A simple and well-performing design for phase i oncology trials

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 22, Issue 17, 2016, Pages 4291-4301

  Yuan, Ying ^a   Hess, Kenneth R ^a   Hilsenbeck, Susan G ^b   Gilbert, Mark R ^c  

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

^b BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BAYESIAN OPTIMAL INTERVAL DESIGN; CANCER RESEARCH; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DOSE ESCALATION; MODIFIED TOXICITY PROBABILITY INTERVAL DESIGN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAMPLE SIZE; STUDY DESIGN; BAYES THEOREM; DOSE RESPONSE; HUMAN; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASM; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

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

EID: 84988664625     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: 15573265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-0592     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Storer BE. An evaluation of phase I clinical trials designs in the continuous dose-response setting. Stat Med 2001;20:2399-408.
2. Storer BE. Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 1989; 45:925-37.
3. Rogatko A, Schoeneck D, Jonas W, Tighiouart M, Khuri FR, Porter A. Translation of innovative designs into phase I trials. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:4982-6.
4. Korn EL, Midthune D, Chen TT, Rubinstein LV, Christian MC, Simon RM. A comparison of two phase I trial designs. Stat Med 1994;13:1799-806.
5. Ahn C. An evaluation of phase I cancer clinical trial designs. Stat Med 1998;17:1537-49.
6. 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.
7. Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, Siu LL. Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:708-20.
8. Skolnik JM, Barrett JS, Jayaraman B, Patel D, Adamson PC. Shortening the timeline of pediatric phase I trials: the rolling six design. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:190-5.
9. 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.
10. Cheung YK. Dose finding by the Continual Reassessment Method. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2011.
11. Goodman SN, Zahurak ML, Piantadosi S. Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med 1995; 14:1149-61.
12. Iasonos A, O'Quigley J. Continual reassessment and related designs in dose finding studies. Stat Med 2011;30:2057-61.
13. Iasonos A, O'Quigley J. Adaptive dose-finding studies: a review of modelguided phase I clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:2505-11.
14. Liu S, Yuan Y. Bayesian optimal interval designs for phase I clinical trials. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat 2015;64:507-23.
15. Durham SD, Flournoy N. Random walks for quantile estimation. In: Gupta SS, Berger JO, editors. Statistical decision theory and related topics V. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1994. p.467-76.
16. Lin Y, Shih WJ. Statistical properties of the traditional algorithmbased designs for phase I cancer clinical trials. Biostatistics 2001;2: 203-15.
17. Ivanova A, Montazer-Haghighi A, Mohanty SG, Durham SD. Improved up-and-down designs for phase I trials. Stat Med 2003;22: 69-82.
18. Ji Y, Liu P, Li Y, Bekele N. A modified toxicity probability interval method for dose-finding trials. Clin Trials 2010;7:653-63.
19. Simon R, Freidlin B, Rubinstein L, Arbuck SG, Collins J, Christian MC. Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89:1138-47.
20. Liu S, Cai C, Ning J. Up-and-down designs for phase I clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2013;36:218-27.
21. R package BOIN [software on the Internet][cited 2016 May 11]. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/BOIN/index.html.
22. mTPI web application [software on the Internet][cited 2016 May 11]. Available from: http://www.compgenome.org/NGDF/.
23. Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) design desktop program [software on the Internet][cited 2016 May 29]. Available from: https://biostatistics. mdanderson.org/softwaredownload/SingleSoftware.aspx? Software-Id?99.
24. Simulation Codes for My Research Projects [about 5 screens]. [cited 2016 May 29]. Available from: http://odin.mdacc.tmc.edu/yyuan/index-code. html.
25. Ji Y, Wang S. Modified toxicity probability interval design: a safer and more reliable method than the 3 + 3 design for practical phase I trials. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:1785-91.
26. Lin R, Yin G. Bayesian optimal interval designs for dose finding in Drugcombination trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 2015 Jul 15. [Epub ahead of print].
27. Cheung YK, Chappell R. Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late onset toxicities. Biometrics 2000;56:1177-82.
28. Liu S, Yin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian data augmentation dose finding with continual reassessment method and delayed toxicity. Ann Appl Stat 2013; 4:2138-56.