A Statistical Evaluation of Dose Expansion Cohorts in Phase I Clinical Trials

被引:18
|
作者
Boonstra, Philip S. [1 ]
Shen, Jincheng [1 ]
Taylor, Jeremy M. G. [1 ,3 ]
Braun, Thomas M. [1 ]
Griffith, Kent A. [1 ]
Daignault, Stephanie [1 ]
Kalemkerian, Gregory P. [2 ]
Lawrence, Theodore S. [3 ]
Schipper, Matthew J. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Biostat, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Dept Internal Med, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[3] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiat Oncol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
来源
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE | 2015年 / 107卷 / 03期
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
CONTINUAL REASSESSMENT METHOD; MONOCLONAL-ANTIBODY; SINGLE-AGENT; DESIGN; PHARMACOKINETICS; SAFETY;
D O I
10.1093/jnci/dju429
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Phase I trials often include a dose expansion cohort (DEC), in which additional patients are treated at the estimated maximum tolerated dose (MTD) after dose escalation, with the goal of ensuring that data are available from more than six patients at a single dose level. However, protocols do not always detail how, or even if, the additional toxicity data will be used to reanalyze the MTD or whether observed toxicity in the DEC will warrant changing the assigned dose. A DEC strategy has not been statistically justified. Methods: We conducted a simulation study of two phase I designs: the "3+3" and the Continual Reassessment Method (CRM). We quantified how many patients are assigned the true MTD using a 10 to 20 patient DEC and how a sensible reanalysis using the DEC changes the probability of selecting the true MTD. We compared these results with those from an equivalently sized larger CRM that does not include a DEC. Results: With either the 3+3 or CRM, reanalysis with the DEC increased the probability of identifying the true MTD. However, a large CRM without a DEC was more likely to identify the true MTD while still treating 10 or 15 patients at this dose level. Conclusions: Where feasible, a CRM design with no explicit DEC is preferred to designs that fix a dose for all patients in a DEC.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A dose-schedule finding design for phase I-II clinical trials
    Guo, Beibei
    Li, Yisheng
    Yuan, Ying
    JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES C-APPLIED STATISTICS, 2016, 65 (02) : 259 - 272
  • [42] EWOC 2.0: Interactive software for dose escalation in cancer phase I clinical trials
    Xu, Zhiheng
    Tighiouart, Mourad
    Rogatko, Andre
    DRUG INFORMATION JOURNAL, 2007, 41 (02): : 221 - 228
  • [43] Bayesian hybrid dose-finding design in phase I oncology clinical trials
    Yuan, Ying
    Yin, Guosheng
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2011, 30 (17) : 2098 - 2108
  • [44] Innovations for phase I dose-finding designs in pediatric oncology clinical trials
    Doussau, Adelaide
    Geoerger, Birgit
    Jimenez, Irene
    Paoletti, Xavier
    CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2016, 47 : 217 - 227
  • [45] Dose-finding in phase I clinical trials based on toxicity probability intervals
    Ji, Yuan
    Li, Yisheng
    Bekele, B. Nebiyou
    CLINICAL TRIALS, 2007, 4 (03) : 235 - 244
  • [46] AIDE: Adaptive intrapatient dose escalation designs to accelerate Phase I clinical trials
    Zhou, Yanhong
    Zhao, Yujie
    Cicconetti, Greg
    Mu, Yunming
    Yuan, Ying
    Wang, Li
    Penugonda, Sudhir
    Salman, Zeena
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2023, 22 (02) : 300 - 311
  • [47] Finding Maximum Tolerated Dose in Phase I Oncology Clinical Trials with Bayesian Methods
    Sapi, Johanna
    ACTA POLYTECHNICA HUNGARICA, 2024, 21 (06) : 129 - 145
  • [48] Competing designs for drug combination in phase I dose-finding clinical trials
    Riviere, M. -K.
    Dubois, F.
    Zohar, S.
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2015, 34 (01) : 1 - 12
  • [49] Constrained Bayesian optimal designs for phase I clinical trials: Continuous dose space
    Rosenberger, WF
    Haines, LM
    Perevozskaya, I
    MODA6 ADVANCES IN MODEL-ORIENTED DESIGN AND ANALYSIS, 2001, : 225 - 233
  • [50] A robust Bayesian dose-finding design for phase I/II clinical trials
    Liu, Suyu
    Johnson, Valen E.
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2016, 17 (02) : 249 - 263