Literature DB >> 26250444

Multivariate Markov models for the conditional probability of toxicity in phase II trials.

Laura L Fernandes1, Susan Murray1, Jeremy M G Taylor1.   

Abstract

In addition to getting a preliminary assessment of efficacy, phase II trials can also help to determine dose(s) that have an acceptable toxicity profile over repeated cycles as well as identify subgroups with particularly poor toxicity profiles. Correct modeling of the dose-toxicity relationship in patients receiving multiple cycles of the same dose in oncology trials is crucial. A major challenge lies in taking advantage of the conditional nature of data collection, that is each cycle is observed conditional on having no previous toxicities on earlier cycles. We develop a novel and parsimonious model for the probability of toxicity during a kth cycle of therapy, conditional on not seeing toxicity in any of the k-1 previous cycles using a Markov model, hereafter we refer to these probabilities as conditional probabilities of toxicity. Our model allows the conditional probability of toxicity to depend on randomized dose group, cumulative dose from prior cycles, a measure of how consistently a patient responds to the same dose exposure and individual risk factors influencing the ability to tolerate the treatment regimen. Simulations studying finite sample properties of the model are given. Finally, the approach is demonstrated in a phase II trial studying two dose levels of ifosfamide plus doxorubicin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in soft tissue sarcoma patients over four cycles. The Markov model provides correct estimates of the probabilities of toxicity in finite sample simulations. It also correctly models the data from the phase II clinical trial, and identifies particularly high cumulative toxicity in females.
© 2015 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dose finding; Markov models; Multiple cycles; Phase II clinical trial; Repeated measures

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26250444      PMCID: PMC8133771          DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201400047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biom J        ISSN: 0323-3847            Impact factor:   2.207


  9 in total

1.  Longitudinal design for phase I clinical trials using the continual reassessment method.

Authors:  A T Legedza; J G Ibrahim
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2000-12

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.  Penalized loss functions for Bayesian model comparison.

Authors:  Martyn Plummer
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2008-01-21       Impact factor: 5.899

4.  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

5.  Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer.

Authors:  J O'Quigley; M Pepe; L Fisher
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Dose-finding design using mixed-effect proportional odds model for longitudinal graded toxicity data in phase I oncology clinical trials.

Authors:  Adélaïde Doussau; Rodolphe Thiébaut; Xavier Paoletti
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Randomized phase II evaluation of 6 g/m2 of ifosfamide plus doxorubicin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) compared with 12 g/m2 of ifosfamide plus doxorubicin and G-CSF in the treatment of poor-prognosis soft tissue sarcoma.

Authors:  Francis P Worden; Jeremy M G Taylor; Janet S Biermann; Vernon K Sondak; Kirstin M Leu; Rashmi Chugh; Cornelius J McGinn; Mark M Zalupski; Laurence H Baker
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-01-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Assessment of ifosfamide pharmacokinetics, toxicity, and relation to CYP3A4 activity as measured by the erythromycin breath test in patients with sarcoma.

Authors:  Rashmi Chugh; Thomas Wagner; Kent A Griffith; Jeremy M G Taylor; Dafydd G Thomas; Francis P Worden; Kirsten M Leu; Mark M Zalupski; Laurence H Baker
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Model calibration in the continual reassessment method.

Authors:  Shing M Lee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.486

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.