Literature DB >> 12933626

Continual reassessment designs with early termination.

John O'Quigley1.   

Abstract

The continual reassessment method (CRM) is an increasingly popular approach for estimating the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in phase I dose finding studies. In its original formulation, the scheme is based on a fixed sample size. Many experimenters feel that, whenever possible, it may be advantageous to bring these trials to an early halt and thus reduce average sample size required to complete the study. To address this issue a stopping rule has been proposed (O'Quigley and Reiner, 1998) based on the idea that continuing the study would not lead to a change in recommendation with high probability. The rule, based on precise probabilistic calculation, is quite involved and not straightforward to implement. A much simpler rule can be constructed based on the idea of having settled at some level. In this work we investigate more deeply the essential ingredients behind these rules and consider more closely their operating characteristics.

Year:  2002        PMID: 12933626     DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/3.1.87

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biostatistics        ISSN: 1465-4644            Impact factor:   5.899


  11 in total

1.  Incorporating lower grade toxicity information into dose finding designs.

Authors:  Alexia Iasonos; Sarah Zohar; John O'Quigley
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 2.  Modelling and simulation in the development and use of anti-cancer agents: an underused tool?

Authors:  Ferdinand Rombout; Leon Aarons; Mats Karlsson; Anthony Man; France Mentré; Peter Nygren; Amy Racine; Hans Schaefer; Jean-Louis Steimer; Iñaki Troconiz; Achiel van Peer
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.745

3.  A simulation-based comparison of the traditional method, Rolling-6 design and a frequentist version of the continual reassessment method with special attention to trial duration in pediatric Phase I oncology trials.

Authors:  Arzu Onar-Thomas; Zang Xiong
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 2.226

4.  Continual Reassessment and Related Dose-Finding Designs.

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

5.  Adaptive Optimal Designs for Dose-Finding Studies with Time-to-Event Outcomes.

Authors:  Yevgen Ryeznik; Oleksandr Sverdlov; Andrew C Hooker
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 4.009

6.  Continual reassessment method vs. traditional empirically based design: modifications motivated by Phase I trials in pediatric oncology by the Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium.

Authors:  Arzu Onar; Mehmet Kocak; James M Boyett
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.051

7.  Stopping rules for phase I clinical trials with dose expansion cohorts.

Authors:  Sean M Devlin; Alexia Iasonos; John O'Quigley
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2021-12-24       Impact factor: 2.494

8.  How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method.

Authors:  Graham M Wheeler; Adrian P Mander; Alun Bedding; Kristian Brock; Victoria Cornelius; Andrew P Grieve; Thomas Jaki; Sharon B Love; Lang'o Odondi; Christopher J Weir; Christina Yap; Simon J Bond
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies.

Authors:  Alexia Iasonos; Andrew S Wilton; Elyn R Riedel; Venkatraman E Seshan; David R Spriggs
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.486

10.  Changing the Paradigm for the Treatment and Development of New Therapies for FSGS.

Authors:  Cathie Spino; Jordan S Jahnke; David T Selewski; Susan Massengill; Jonathan Troost; Debbie S Gipson
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 3.418

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.