Literature DB >> 25710960

A statistical evaluation of dose expansion cohorts in phase I clinical trials.

Philip S Boonstra1, Jincheng Shen2, Jeremy M G Taylor2, Thomas M Braun2, Kent A Griffith2, Stephanie Daignault2, Gregory P Kalemkerian2, Theodore S Lawrence2, Matthew J Schipper2.   

Abstract

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.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25710960      PMCID: PMC4565529          DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju429

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  23 in total

1.  Rethinking risk-benefit assessment for phase I cancer trials.

Authors:  Steven Joffe; Franklin G Miller
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-07-01       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Translation of innovative designs into phase I trials.

Authors:  André Rogatko; David Schoeneck; William Jonas; Mourad Tighiouart; Fadlo R Khuri; Alan Porter
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Modified toxicity probability interval design: a safer and more reliable method than the 3 + 3 design for practical phase I trials.

Authors:  Yuan Ji; Sue-Jane Wang
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Phase I dose-escalation study of intravenous aflibercept in combination with docetaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Authors:  Nicolas Isambert; Gilles Freyer; Sylvie Zanetta; Benoît You; Pierre Fumoleau; Claire Falandry; Laure Favier; Sylvie Assadourian; Karen Soussan-Lazard; Samira Ziti-Ljajic; Veronique Trillet-Lenoir
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  Pixantrone dimaleate in combination with fludarabine, dexamethasone, and rituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma: phase 1 study with a dose-expansion cohort.

Authors:  Tomasz P Srokowski; James E Liebmann; Manuel R Modiano; Gary I Cohen; Barbara Pro; Jorge E Romaguera; Christine Kuepfer; Jack W Singer; Luis E Fayad
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Phase I safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic study of ENMD-2076, a novel angiogenic and Aurora kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Authors:  Jennifer R Diamond; Bruno R Bastos; Ryan J Hansen; Daniel L Gustafson; S Gail Eckhardt; Eunice L Kwak; Shuchi S Pandya; Graham C Fletcher; Todd M Pitts; Gillian N Kulikowski; Mark Morrow; Jamie Arnott; Mark R Bray; Carolyn Sidor; Wells Messersmith; Geoffrey I Shapiro
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-12-03       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Dose-finding designs in pediatric phase I clinical trials: comparison by simulations in a realistic timeline framework.

Authors:  A Doussau; B Asselain; M C Le Deley; B Geoerger; F Doz; G Vassal; X Paoletti
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-04-13       Impact factor: 2.226

8.  Evaluation of statistical designs in phase I expansion cohorts: the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center experience.

Authors:  Suzanne E Dahlberg; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Jeffrey W Clark; Bruce E Johnson
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of AMG 102, a fully human hepatocyte growth factor-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, in a first-in-human study of patients with advanced solid tumors.

Authors:  Michael S Gordon; Christopher S Sweeney; David S Mendelson; S Gail Eckhardt; Abraham Anderson; Darrin M Beaupre; Daniel Branstetter; Teresa L Burgess; Angela Coxon; Hongjie Deng; Paula Kaplan-Lefko; Ian M Leitch; Kelly S Oliner; Lucy Yan; Min Zhu; Lia Gore
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-01-12       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 10.  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

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Evaluating the role of phase I expansion cohorts in oncologic drug development.

Authors:  Robin E Norris; Mohadese Behtaj; Pingfu Fu; Afshin Dowlati
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2016-10-07       Impact factor: 3.850

Review 2.  Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel.

Authors:  Hartmut Döhner; Elihu Estey; David Grimwade; Sergio Amadori; Frederick R Appelbaum; Thomas Büchner; Hervé Dombret; Benjamin L Ebert; Pierre Fenaux; Richard A Larson; Ross L Levine; Francesco Lo-Coco; Tomoki Naoe; Dietger Niederwieser; Gert J Ossenkoppele; Miguel Sanz; Jorge Sierra; Martin S Tallman; Hwei-Fang Tien; Andrew H Wei; Bob Löwenberg; Clara D Bloomfield
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 22.113

3.  Statistical justification of expansion cohorts in phase 1 cancer trials.

Authors:  Ali A Mokdad; Xian-Jin Xie; Hong Zhu; David E Gerber; Daniel F Heitjan
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Use of Expansion Cohorts in Phase I Trials and Probability of Success in Phase II for 381 Anticancer Drugs.

Authors:  Diogo D G Bugano; Kenneth Hess; Denis L F Jardim; Alona Zer; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Lillian L Siu; Albiruni R A Razak; David S Hong
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  Statistical controversies in clinical research: building the bridge to phase II-efficacy estimation in dose-expansion cohorts.

Authors:  P S Boonstra; T M Braun; J M G Taylor; K M Kidwell; E L Bellile; S Daignault; L Zhao; K A Griffith; T S Lawrence; G P Kalemkerian; M J Schipper
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 32.976

6.  Unified exact design with early stopping rules for single arm clinical trials with multiple endpoints.

Authors:  Wei Wei; Denise Esserman; Michael Kane; Daniel Zelterman
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 3.021

7.  Drug-development, dose-selection, rational combinations from bench-to-bedside: are there any lessons worth revisiting?

Authors:  Alexander J Bridges; Ranjit K Mehta; Sushmita Shukla; Matthew J Schipper; Theodore S Lawrence; Mukesh K Nyati
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2021-05-25

8.  Motivating sample sizes in adaptive Phase I trials via Bayesian posterior credible intervals.

Authors:  Thomas M Braun
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 1.701

9.  A modular framework for early-phase seamless oncology trials.

Authors:  Philip S Boonstra; Thomas M Braun; Elizabeth C Chase
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 2.599

Review 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.