Jun Yin1, Xavier Paoletti2, Daniel J Sargent1, Sumithra J Mandrekar1. 1. 1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 2. 2 Biostatistics and Epidemiology Department, INSERM CESP, OncoStat, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Phase I trials are designed to determine the safety, tolerability, and recommended phase 2 dose of therapeutic agents for subsequent testing. The dose-finding paradigm has thus traditionally focused on identifying the maximum tolerable dose of an agent or combination therapy under the assumption that there is a non-decreasing relationship between dose-toxicity and dose-efficacy. The dose is typically determined based on the probability of severe toxicity observed during the first treatment cycle. A novel endpoint, the total toxicity profile, was previously developed to account for the multiple toxicity types and grades experienced in the first cycle. More recently, this was extended to a repeated measures design based on the total toxicity profile to account for longitudinal toxicities over multiple treatment cycles in the absence of within-patient correlation. METHODS: In this work, we propose to extend the design in the presence of within-patient correlation. Furthermore, we provide a framework to detect a toxicity time trend (toxicity increasing, decreasing, or stable) over multiple treatment cycles. We utilize a linear mixed model in the Bayesian framework, with the addition of Bayesian risk functions for decision-making in dose assignment. RESULTS: The performance of this design was evaluated using simulation studies and real data from a phase I trial. We demonstrated that using available toxicity data from all cycles of treatment improves the accuracy of maximum tolerated dose identification and allows for the detection of a time trend. The performance is consistent regardless of the strength of the within-patient correlation. In addition, the use of a quasi-continuous total toxicity profile score significantly increased the power to detect time trends compared to when binary data only were used. CONCLUSION: The increased interest in molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapies in oncology necessitates innovative phase I study designs. Our proposed framework provides a tool to tackle some of the challenges presented by these novel agents, specifically through the ability to understand patterns of toxicity over time, which is important in the cases of cumulative or late toxicities.
BACKGROUND: Phase I trials are designed to determine the safety, tolerability, and recommended phase 2 dose of therapeutic agents for subsequent testing. The dose-finding paradigm has thus traditionally focused on identifying the maximum tolerable dose of an agent or combination therapy under the assumption that there is a non-decreasing relationship between dose-toxicity and dose-efficacy. The dose is typically determined based on the probability of severe toxicity observed during the first treatment cycle. A novel endpoint, the total toxicity profile, was previously developed to account for the multiple toxicity types and grades experienced in the first cycle. More recently, this was extended to a repeated measures design based on the total toxicity profile to account for longitudinal toxicities over multiple treatment cycles in the absence of within-patient correlation. METHODS: In this work, we propose to extend the design in the presence of within-patient correlation. Furthermore, we provide a framework to detect a toxicity time trend (toxicity increasing, decreasing, or stable) over multiple treatment cycles. We utilize a linear mixed model in the Bayesian framework, with the addition of Bayesian risk functions for decision-making in dose assignment. RESULTS: The performance of this design was evaluated using simulation studies and real data from a phase I trial. We demonstrated that using available toxicity data from all cycles of treatment improves the accuracy of maximum tolerated dose identification and allows for the detection of a time trend. The performance is consistent regardless of the strength of the within-patient correlation. In addition, the use of a quasi-continuous total toxicity profile score significantly increased the power to detect time trends compared to when binary data only were used. CONCLUSION: The increased interest in molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapies in oncology necessitates innovative phase I study designs. Our proposed framework provides a tool to tackle some of the challenges presented by these novel agents, specifically through the ability to understand patterns of toxicity over time, which is important in the cases of cumulative or late toxicities.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dose-finding; adaptive; continual reassessment method; correlated toxicity; immunotherapy; maximum tolerated dose; molecularly targeted agents; phase I clinical trials; repeated measures; time trend
Authors: Sophie Postel-Vinay; Carlos Gomez-Roca; L Rhoda Molife; Bhavesh Anghan; Antonin Levy; Ian Judson; Johann De Bono; Jean-Charles Soria; Stan Kaye; Xavier Paoletti Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-03-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Roy S Herbst; Jean-Charles Soria; Marcin Kowanetz; Gregg D Fine; Omid Hamid; Michael S Gordon; Jeffery A Sosman; David F McDermott; John D Powderly; Scott N Gettinger; Holbrook E K Kohrt; Leora Horn; Donald P Lawrence; Sandra Rost; Maya Leabman; Yuanyuan Xiao; Ahmad Mokatrin; Hartmut Koeppen; Priti S Hegde; Ira Mellman; Daniel S Chen; F Stephen Hodi Journal: Nature Date: 2014-11-27 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Julie R Brahmer; Charles G Drake; Ira Wollner; John D Powderly; Joel Picus; William H Sharfman; Elizabeth Stankevich; Alice Pons; Theresa M Salay; Tracee L McMiller; Marta M Gilson; Changyu Wang; Mark Selby; Janis M Taube; Robert Anders; Lieping Chen; Alan J Korman; Drew M Pardoll; Israel Lowy; Suzanne L Topalian Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-06-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Suzanne L Topalian; F Stephen Hodi; Julie R Brahmer; Scott N Gettinger; David C Smith; David F McDermott; John D Powderly; Richard D Carvajal; Jeffrey A Sosman; Michael B Atkins; Philip D Leming; David R Spigel; Scott J Antonia; Leora Horn; Charles G Drake; Drew M Pardoll; Lieping Chen; William H Sharfman; Robert A Anders; Janis M Taube; Tracee L McMiller; Haiying Xu; Alan J Korman; Maria Jure-Kunkel; Shruti Agrawal; Daniel McDonald; Georgia D Kollia; Ashok Gupta; Jon M Wigginton; Mario Sznol Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Luis H Camacho; Scott Antonia; Jeffrey Sosman; John M Kirkwood; Thomas F Gajewski; Bruce Redman; Dmitri Pavlov; Cecile Bulanhagui; Viviana A Bozon; Jesus Gomez-Navarro; Antoni Ribas Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-01-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sophie Postel-Vinay; Laurence Collette; Xavier Paoletti; Elisa Rizzo; Christophe Massard; David Olmos; Camilla Fowst; Bernard Levy; Pierre Mancini; Denis Lacombe; Percy Ivy; Lesley Seymour; Christophe Le Tourneau; Lillian L Siu; Stan B Kaye; Jaap Verweij; Jean-Charles Soria Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2014-05-28 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jacquie H Chirgwin; Anita Giobbie-Hurder; Alan S Coates; Karen N Price; Bent Ejlertsen; Marc Debled; Richard D Gelber; Aron Goldhirsch; Ian Smith; Manuela Rabaglio; John F Forbes; Patrick Neven; István Láng; Marco Colleoni; Beat Thürlimann Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 44.544