Literature DB >> 25962576

A Phase I/II adaptive design for heterogeneous groups with application to a stereotactic body radiation therapy trial.

Nolan A Wages1, Paul W Read2, Gina R Petroni1.   

Abstract

Dose-finding studies that aim to evaluate the safety of single agents are becoming less common, and advances in clinical research have complicated the paradigm of dose finding in oncology. A class of more complex problems, such as targeted agents, combination therapies and stratification of patients by clinical or genetic characteristics, has created the need to adapt early-phase trial design to the specific type of drug being investigated and the corresponding endpoints. In this article, we describe the implementation of an adaptive design based on a continual reassessment method for heterogeneous groups, modified to coincide with the objectives of a Phase I/II trial of stereotactic body radiation therapy in patients with painful osseous metastatic disease. Operating characteristics of the Institutional Review Board approved design are demonstrated under various possible true scenarios via simulation studies.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Phase I; Phase I/II; adaptive design; dose-finding; heterogeneity; optimal dose

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25962576      PMCID: PMC4608237          DOI: 10.1002/pst.1686

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharm Stat        ISSN: 1539-1604            Impact factor:   1.894


  22 in total

1.  Heterogeneity in phase I clinical trials: prior elicitation and computation using the continual reassessment method.

Authors:  A T Legedza; J G Ibrahim
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  The current design of oncology phase I clinical trials: progressing from algorithms to statistical models.

Authors:  Thomas M Braun
Journal:  Chin Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-03

Review 3.  Extended model-based designs for more complex dose-finding studies.

Authors:  John O'Quigley; Mark Conaway
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Bivariate isotonic design for dose-finding with ordered groups.

Authors:  Anastasia Ivanova; Kai Wang
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-06-30       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Patient-specific dose finding based on bivariate outcomes and covariates.

Authors:  Peter F Thall; Hoang Q Nguyen; Elihu H Estey
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of imatinib mesylate in patients with advanced malignancies and varying degrees of liver dysfunction: a study by the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group.

Authors:  Ramesh K Ramanathan; Merrill J Egorin; Chris H M Takimoto; Scot C Remick; James H Doroshow; Patricia A LoRusso; Daniel L Mulkerin; Jean L Grem; Anne Hamilton; Anthony J Murgo; Douglas M Potter; Chandra P Belani; Michael J Hayes; Bin Peng; S Percy Ivy
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-01       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  A Bayesian Dose-finding Design for Oncology Clinical Trials of Combinational Biological Agents.

Authors:  Chunyan Cai; Ying Yuan; Yuan Ji
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 1.864

8.  Phase I/II adaptive design for drug combination oncology trials.

Authors:  Nolan A Wages; Mark R Conaway
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Continual reassessment method for ordered groups.

Authors:  John O'Quigley; Xavier Paoletti
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Bridging Solutions in Dose Finding Problems.

Authors:  John O'Quigley; Alexia Iasonos
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 1.452

View more
  12 in total

1.  Isotonic designs for phase I trials in partially ordered groups.

Authors:  Mark Conaway
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 2.486

2.  Identifying a maximum tolerated contour in two-dimensional dose finding.

Authors:  Nolan A Wages
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 3.  Implementation of adaptive methods in early-phase clinical trials.

Authors:  Gina R Petroni; Nolan A Wages; Gautier Paux; Frédéric Dubois
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  The Impact of Early-Phase Trial Design in the Drug Development Process.

Authors:  Mark R Conaway; Gina R Petroni
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  A design for phase I trials in completely or partially ordered groups.

Authors:  Mark R Conaway
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Designs for phase I trials in ordered groups.

Authors:  Mark R Conaway; Nolan A Wages
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Shift models for dose-finding in partially ordered groups.

Authors:  Bethany Jablonski Horton; Nolan A Wages; Mark R Conaway
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 8.  Innovations for phase I dose-finding designs in pediatric oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  Adelaide Doussau; Birgit Geoerger; Irene Jiménez; Xavier Paoletti
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 2.226

Review 9.  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

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.