Literature DB >> 16740385

Using the continual reassessment method: lessons learned from an EORTC phase I dose finding study.

Xavier Paoletti1, Benoît Baron, Patrick Schöffski, Pierre Fumoleau, Denis Lacombe, Sandrine Marreaud, Richard Sylvester.   

Abstract

Many clinicians often do not feel comfortable with the Continual Reassessment Method (CRM). This article reviews its implementation, showing the characteristics, advantages and limitations of this method in Phase I studies as an alternative to the classical 'Fibonacci' escalation schema. A two center, dose escalation phase I study of rViscumin was carried out. Thirty-seven patients were included at 14 different dose-levels (10 to 6400 ng/kg). The complete clinical results are presented elsewhere. A 2-step CRM design enables one to speed-up the study and most importantly to obtain an accurate estimate of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Different management issues related to a multicenter study are illustrated and we show how the method can go wrong when severe toxicity, or dose limiting toxicity (DLT), is not considered by the clinician as being sufficient to limit dose escalation (here a grade 3 asthenia related to the drug). This would have affected any dose finding methods. We believe that CRM is a good alternative to the standard method from both a statistical and a practical point of view but further methodological research is necessary to address the issues related to the composite nature of the endpoint.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16740385     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2006.01.051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  13 in total

1.  Extending clinical equipoise to phase 1 trials involving patients: unresolved problems.

Authors:  James A Anderson; Jonathan Kimmelman
Journal:  Kennedy Inst Ethics J       Date:  2010-03

2.  Quality assessment of phase I dose-finding cancer trials: proposal of a checklist.

Authors:  Sarah Zohar; Qing Lian; Vincent Levy; Ken Cheung; Anastasia Ivanova; Sylvie Chevret
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 3.  Statistical controversies in clinical research: requiem for the 3 + 3 design for phase I trials.

Authors:  X Paoletti; M Ezzalfani; C Le Tourneau
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  Estimation of the minimum effective dose of tramadol for postoperative analgesia in infants using the continual reassessment method.

Authors:  Yue'e Dai; Dongxu Lei; Zhenghua Huang; Yan Yin; G Allen Finley; Yunxia Zuo
Journal:  Front Med       Date:  2012-08-10       Impact factor: 4.592

Review 5.  Adaptive designs for dual-agent phase I dose-escalation studies.

Authors:  Jennifer A Harrington; Graham M Wheeler; Michael J Sweeting; Adrian P Mander; Duncan I Jodrell
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 6.  Embracing model-based designs for dose-finding trials.

Authors:  Sharon B Love; Sarah Brown; Christopher J Weir; Chris Harbron; Christina Yap; Birgit Gaschler-Markefski; James Matcham; Louise Caffrey; Christopher McKevitt; Sally Clive; Charlie Craddock; James Spicer; Victoria Cornelius
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  Challenges in implementing model-based phase I designs in a grant-funded clinical trials unit.

Authors:  Eleni Frangou; Jane Holmes; Sharon Love; Naomi McGregor; Maria Hawkins
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Toxicity-dependent feasibility bounds for the escalation with overdose control approach in phase I cancer trials.

Authors:  Graham M Wheeler; Michael J Sweeting; Adrian P Mander
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 9.  Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Christophe Le Tourneau; J Jack Lee; Lillian L Siu
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-05-12       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.