Literature DB >> 12230003

A simple technique to evaluate model sensitivity in the continual reassessment method.

Ying Kuen Cheung1, Rick Chappell.   

Abstract

The continual reassessment method (CRM) is a sequential design used in phase I cancer trials to determine the maximal dose with acceptable toxicity. It has been established that the CRM is consistent under model misspecification but not generally. When the method does not converge to the target percentile, some dose-response models will be more sensitive than others in terms of how close the converged recommendation is to the target. In this article, we interpret the main condition under which the CRM is consistent and apply it to evaluate the sensitivity of the model used with the CRM. The technique presented is found to be a useful supplement to simulation when planning a phase I trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12230003     DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2002.00671.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  28 in total

1.  Issues in SMA clinical trial design. The International Coordinating Committee (ICC) for SMA Subcommittee on SMA Clinical Trial Design.

Authors:  P Kaufmann; F Muntoni
Journal:  Neuromuscul Disord       Date:  2007-02-14       Impact factor: 4.296

2.  Continual reassessment method with multiple toxicity constraints.

Authors:  Shing M Lee; Bin Cheng; Ying Kuen Cheung
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 5.899

3.  Dose finding for continuous and ordinal outcomes with a monotone objective function: a unified approach.

Authors:  Anastasia Ivanova; Se Hee Kim
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2008-05-13       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Calibration of prior variance in the Bayesian continual reassessment method.

Authors:  Shing M Lee; Ying Kuen Cheung
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-03-17       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Continual Reassessment and Related Dose-Finding Designs.

Authors:  John O'Quigley; Mark Conaway
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.901

6.  Stochastic approximation with virtual observations for dose-finding on discrete levels.

Authors:  Ying Kuen Cheung; Mitchell S V Elkind
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2009-12-07       Impact factor: 2.445

7.  Phase IB randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, dose escalation study of polyphenon E in women with hormone receptor-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Katherine D Crew; Powel Brown; Heather Greenlee; Therese B Bevers; Banu Arun; Clifford Hudis; Heather L McArthur; Jenny Chang; Mothaffar Rimawi; Lana Vornik; Terri L Cornelison; Antai Wang; Hanina Hibshoosh; Aqeel Ahmed; Mary Beth Terry; Regina M Santella; Scott M Lippman; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2012-07-24

8.  Proportional odds model for dose-finding clinical trial designs with ordinal toxicity grading.

Authors:  Emily M Van Meter; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; Dipankar Bandyopadhyay
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  High-dose lovastatin for acute ischemic stroke: results of the phase I dose escalation neuroprotection with statin therapy for acute recovery trial (NeuSTART).

Authors:  Mitchell S V Elkind; Ralph L Sacco; Robert B Macarthur; Ellinor Peerschke; Greg Neils; Howard Andrews; Joshua Stillman; Tania Corporan; Dana Leifer; Rui Liu; Ken Cheung
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2009-07-16       Impact factor: 2.762

10.  The Neuroprotection with Statin Therapy for Acute Recovery Trial (NeuSTART): an adaptive design phase I dose-escalation study of high-dose lovastatin in acute ischemic stroke.

Authors:  Mitchell S V Elkind; Ralph L Sacco; Robert B MacArthur; Daniel J Fink; Ellinor Peerschke; Howard Andrews; Greg Neils; Josh Stillman; Tania Corporan; Dana Leifer; Ken Cheung
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 5.266

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.