Embracing model-based designs for dose-finding trials

British Journal of Cancer

Volumn 117, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 332-339

  Love, Sharon B ^a   Brown, Sarah ^b   Weir, Christopher J ^c   Harbron, Chris ^d   Yap, Christina ^e   Gaschler Markefski, Birgit ^f   Matcham, James ^g   Caffrey, Louise ^h   McKevitt, Christopher ⁱ   Clive, Sally ^j   Craddock, Charlie ^k   Spicer, James ^l   Cornelius, Victoria ^m  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^d ROCHE PRODUCTS LTD   (United Kingdom)

^e IMPERIAL CANCER RESEARCH FUND   (United Kingdom)

^f BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM PHARMA GMBH AND CO KG   (Germany)

^g ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

^h TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

ⁱ KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^j WESTERN GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^k QUEEN ELIZABETH HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^l GUY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^m IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CONTINUAL REASSESSMENT METHOD; DOSE CALCULATION; DRUG INDUSTRY; EMBASE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDLINE; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; ATTITUDE; DOSE RESPONSE; ECONOMICS; EDUCATION; PERSONNEL; PROCEDURES; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SOFTWARE; STATISTICAL MODEL; TIME FACTOR;

ATTITUDE; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RESEARCH PERSONNEL; SOFTWARE; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 85029284425     PISSN: 00070920     EISSN: 15321827     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.186     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Babb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S (1998) Cancer phase I clinical trials: Efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat Med 17(10): 1103-1120.
2. Boonstra PS, Shen J, Taylor JM, Braun TM, Griffith KA, Daignault S, Kalemkerian GP, Lawrence TS, Schipper MJ (2015) A statistical evaluation of dose expansion cohorts in phase I clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 107(3): 429.
3. Braun TM (2014) The current design of oncology phase I clinical trials: Progressing from algorithms to statistical models. Chin Clin Oncol 3(1): 2.
4. Calvert AH, Plummer R (2008) The development of phase I cancer trial methodologies: The use of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic end points sets the scene for phase 0 cancer clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 14(12): 3664-3669.
5. Carter SK (1987) The phase I study. In: Hellmann K, Carter SK (eds). Fundamentals of Cancer Chemotherapy. McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, pp xv, p 527.
6. Cedars-Sinai (2017) Web-EWOC: Interactive web tool for Designing and Conducting Dose Finding Trials in Cancer, Vol. 2017. Available at: Https://biostatistics.csmc.edu/ewoc/ewocWeb.php (last accessed 26 April 2017).
7. Cheung YK, Chappell R (2000) Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late-onset toxicities. Biometrics 56(4): 1177-1182.
8. Chevret S (2012) Bayesian adaptive clinical trials: A dream for statisticians only Stat Med 31(11-12): 1002-1013.
9. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (2007) Guideline on strategies to identify and mitigate risks for first-in-human clinical trials with investigational medicinal products. European Medicines Agency: London, UK. Doc. ref.emea/chmp/swp/28367/07. Available at: Http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/2009/09/WC500002988.pdf (last accessed 17 January 2017).
10. De Lima M, Giralt S, Thall PF, Silva LD, Jones RB, Komanduri K, Braun TM, Nguyen HQ, Champlin R, Garcia-Manero G (2010) Maintenance therapy with low-dose azacitidine after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for recurrent acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. Cancer 116(23): 5420-5431.
11. Dimairo M, Boote J, Julious SA, Nicholl JP, Todd S (2015a) Missing steps in a staircase: A qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials 16: 430.
12. Dimairo M, Julious SA, Todd S, Nicholl JP, Boote J (2015b) Cross-sector surveys assessing perceptions of key stakeholders towards barriers, concerns and facilitators to the appropriate use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials 16: 585.
13. Doussau A, Thiebaut R, Geoerger B, Schoffski P, Floquet A, Le Deley MC, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Rizzo E, Fumoleau P, Le Tourneau C, Paoletti X (2015) A new approach to integrate toxicity grade and repeated treatment cycles in the analysis and reporting of phase I dose-finding trials. Ann Oncol 26(2): 422-428.
14. European Medicines Agency (2014) Qualification Opinion of MCP-Mod as an Efficient Statistical Methodology for Model-Based Design and Analysis of Phase II Dose Finding Studies Under Model Uncertainty, Vol. 2014. European Medicines Agency: London, UK. Doc ref EMA/CHMP/SAWP/757052/2013. Available at: Http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Regulatory-and-procedural-guideline/2014/02/WC500161027.pdf (last accessed 17 January 2017).
15. Europeans Medicines Agency (2015) Report from Dose Finding Workshop, Vol. 2015. European Medicines Agency: London, UK. Doc ref EMA/117491/2015. Available at: Http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Report/2015/04/WC500185864.pdf (last accessed 16 January 2017).
16. Garrett-Mayer E (2006) The continual reassessment method for dose-finding studies: A tutorial. Clin Trials 3(1): 57-71.
17. Hemmings R (2006) Philosophy and methodology of dose-finding-a regulatory perspective. In: Chevret S (ed). Statistical Methods for Dose-Finding Experiments. Wiley: Chichester, UK.
18. Iasonos A, Gonen M, Bosl GJ (2015) Scientific review of phase I protocols with novel dose-escalation designs: How much information is needed J Clin Oncol 33(19): 2221-2225.
19. Iasonos A, Gounder M, Spriggs DR, Gerecitano JF, Hyman DM, Zohar S, O'Quigley J (2012) The impact of non-drug-related toxicities on the estimation of the maximum tolerated dose in phase I trials. Clin Cancer Res 18(19): 5179-5187.
20. Iasonos A, O'Quigley J (2014) Adaptive dose-finding studies: A review of model-guided phase I clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 32(23): 2505-2511.
21. Iasonos A, Wilton AS, Riedel ER, Seshan VE, Spriggs DR (2008) A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3\+3 dose escalation scheme in phase I dose-finding studies. Clin Trials 5(5): 465-477.
22. Iasonos A, Zohar S, O'Quigley J (2010) Two-stage continual reassessment method that determines dose escalation based on individual toxicity grades. Clin Trials 7: 496.
23. ICH E4 (1994) Dose-Response Information to Support Drug Registration, Vol. 1994. The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH): Geneva, Switzerland. Available at: Http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public-Web-Site/ICH-Products/Guidelines/Efficacy/E4/Step4/E4-Guideline.pdf (last accessed 16 January 2017).
24. Ishizuka N, Ohashi Y (2001) The continual reassessment method and its applications: A Bayesian methodology for phase I cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 20(17-18): 2661-2681.
25. Jaki T (2013) Uptake of novel statistical methods for early-phase clinical studies in the UK public sector. Clin Trials 10(2): 344-346.
26. Jaki T, Clive S, Weir CJ (2013) Principles of dose finding studies in cancer: A comparison of trial designs. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 71(5): 1107-1114.
27. Jones DR, Moskaluk CA, Gillenwater HH, Petroni GR, Burks SG, Philips J, Rehm PK, Olazagasti J, Kozower BD, Bao YD (2012) Phase I trial of induction histone deacetylase and proteasome inhibition followed by surgery in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 7(11): 1683-1690.
28. Korn EL, Midthune D, Chen TT, Rubinstein LV, Christian MC, Simon RM (1994) A comparison of 2 phase-I trial designs. Stat Med 13(18): 1799-1806.
29. Le Tourneau C, Gan HK, Razak AR, Paoletti X (2012) Efficiency of new dose escalation designs in dose-finding phase I trials of molecularly targeted agents. PLoS ONE 7(12): E51039.
30. Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, Siu LL (2009) Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(10): 708-720.
31. Levy V, Zohar S, Bardin C, Vekhoff A, Chaoui D, Rio B, Legrand O, Sentenac S, Rousselot P, Raffoux E, Chast F, Chevret S, Marie JP (2006) A phase I dose-finding and pharmacokinetic study of subcutaneous semisynthetic homoharringtonine (ssHHT) in patients with advanced acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Cancer 95(3): 253-259.
32. Mandrekar SJ, Cui Y, Sargent DJ (2007) An adaptive phase I design for identifying a biologically optimal dose for dual agent drug combinations. Stat Med 26(11): 2317-2330.
33. Morgan CC, Huyck S, Jenkins M, Chen L, Bedding A, Coffey CS, Gaydos B, Wathen JK (2014) Adaptive design: Results of 2012 survey on perception and use. Ther Innov Regul Sci 48(4): 473-481.
34. Morita S, Toi M, Saji S, Iwata H, Ohno S, Ito Y, Kobayashi T, Hozumi Y, Sakamoto J (2007) Practical application of the continual reassessment method to a phase I dose-finding trial in advanced breast cancer. Drug Inf J 41(6): 691-700.
35. MRC Hubs for Trials Methodology Research (2015) Network Hubs: Adaptive Designs, Vol. 2016. Medical Research Council: London, UK. Available at: Http://www.methodologyhubs.mrc.ac.uk/research/working-groups/adaptive-designs/(last accessed 8 December 2016).
36. Neuenschwander B, Branson M, Gsponer T (2008) Critical aspects of the Bayesian approach to phase I cancer trials. Stat Med 27(13): 2420-2439.
37. NIHR Statistics Group (2016) Research: Early Phase Trials, Vol. 2016. King's College London: London, UK. Available at: Http://statisticsgroup. nihr.ac.uk/research/early-phase-clinical-trials (last accessed 8 December 2016).
38. O'Quigley J (1999) Another look at two phase I clinical trial designs. Stat Med 18(20): 2683-2690.
39. O'Quigley J, Conaway M (2011) Extended model-based designs for more complex dose-finding studies. Stat Med 30(17): 2062-2069.
40. O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L (1990) Continual reassessment method: A practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 46(1): 33-48.
41. Onar A, Kocak M, Boyett JM (2009) Continual reassessment method vs. traditional empirically based design: Modifications motivated by phase I trials in pediatric oncology by the Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium. J Biopharm Stat 19(3): 437-455.
42. Paoletti X, Baron B, Schoffski P, Fumoleau P, Lacombe D, Marreaud S, Sylvester R (2006) Using the continual reassessment method: Lessons learned from an EORTC phase I dose finding study. Eur J Cancer 42(10): 1362-1368.
43. Paoletti X, Ezzalfani M, Le Tourneau C (2015) Statistical controversies in clinical research: Requiem for the 3\+3 design for phase I trials. Ann Oncol 26(9): 1808-1812.
44. Petroni GR, Wages NA, Paux G, Dubois F (2017) Implementation of adaptive methods in early-phase clinical trials. Stat Med 36(2): 215-224.
45. Potter DM (2002) Adaptive dose finding for phase I clinical trials of drugs used for chemotherapy of cancer. Stat Med 21(13): 1805-1823.
46. Rogatko A, Schoeneck D, Jonas W, Tighiouart M, Khuri FR, Porter A (2007) Translation of innovative designs into phase I trials. J Clin Oncol 25(31): 4982-4986.
47. Thall PF, Lee SJ (2003) Practical model-based dose-finding in phase I clinical trials: Methods based on toxicity. Int J Gynecol Cancer 13(3): 251-261.
48. van Brummelen EMJ, Huitema ADR, van Werkhoven E, Beijnen JH, Schellens JHM (2016) The performance of model-based versus rulebased phase I clinical trials in oncology. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 43: 235-242.
49. van Meter E, Slone S, Weiss H, Reynolds J, Hayslip J (2012) Implementation of likelihood-based continual reassessment method designs in dose finding trials. Clin Trials 9: 550.
50. Wages NA (2017) Web Application for Simulating Operating Characteristics of the Bayesian CRM: Bayesian Continual Reassessment Method for Phase I Clinical Trials. Available at: Https://uvatrapps.shinyapps.io/crmb/(last accessed 27 April 2017).
51. Wages NA, Read PW, Petroni GR (2015) A phase I/II adaptive design for heterogeneous groups with application to a stereotactic body radiation therapy trial. Pharm Stat 14(4): 302-310.