Literature DB >> 34636054

Precision Bayesian phase I-II dose-finding based on utilities tailored to prognostic subgroups.

Juhee Lee1, Peter F Thall2, Pavlos Msaouel3.   

Abstract

A Bayesian phase I-II design is presented that optimizes the dose of a new agent within predefined prognostic subgroups. The design is motivated by a trial to evaluate targeted agents for treating metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma, where a prognostic risk score defined by clinical variables and biomarkers is well established. Two clinical outcomes are used for dose-finding, time-to-toxicity during a prespecified follow-up period, and efficacy characterized by ordinal disease status evaluated at the end of follow-up. A joint probability model is constructed for these outcomes as functions of dose and subgroup. The model performs adaptive clustering of adjacent subgroups having similar dose-outcome distributions to facilitate borrowing information across subgroups. To quantify toxicity-efficacy risk-benefit trade-offs that may differ between subgroups, the objective function is based on outcome utilities elicited separately for each subgroup. In the context of the renal cancer trial, a design is constructed and a simulation study is presented to evaluate the design's reliability, safety, and robustness, and to compare it to designs that either ignore subgroups or run a separate trial within each subgroup.
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian phase I-II clinical trial design; adaptive randomization; clustering; dose finding; patient prognostic subgroups

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34636054      PMCID: PMC9175509          DOI: 10.1002/sim.9120

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.497


  18 in total

1.  Design considerations for dose-expansion cohorts in phase I trials.

Authors:  Alexia Iasonos; John O'Quigley
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  On the clinical meaningfulness of a treatment's effect on a time-to-event variable.

Authors:  Steven Snapinn; Qi Jiang
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Continual Reassessment and Related Dose-Finding Designs.

Authors:  John O'Quigley; Mark Conaway
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.901

4.  Optimizing natural killer cell doses for heterogeneous cancer patients on the basis of multiple event times.

Authors:  Juhee Lee; Peter F Thall; Katy Rezvani
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 1.864

5.  Robust treatment comparison based on utilities of semi-competing risks in non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Thomas A Murray; Peter F Thall; Ying Yuan; Sarah McAvoy; Daniel R Gomez
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2017-05-03       Impact factor: 5.033

6.  Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Brian I Rini; Elizabeth R Plimack; Viktor Stus; Rustem Gafanov; Robert Hawkins; Dmitry Nosov; Frédéric Pouliot; Boris Alekseev; Denis Soulières; Bohuslav Melichar; Ihor Vynnychenko; Anna Kryzhanivska; Igor Bondarenko; Sergio J Azevedo; Delphine Borchiellini; Cezary Szczylik; Maurice Markus; Raymond S McDermott; Jens Bedke; Sophie Tartas; Yen-Hwa Chang; Satoshi Tamada; Qiong Shou; Rodolfo F Perini; Mei Chen; Michael B Atkins; Thomas Powles
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-02-16       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  A utility-based design for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups.

Authors:  Thomas A Murray; Ying Yuan; Peter F Thall; Joan H Elizondo; Wayne L Hofstetter
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Adaptive randomization to improve utility-based dose-finding with bivariate ordinal outcomes.

Authors:  Peter F Thall; Hoang Q Nguyen
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.051

9.  External validation and comparison with other models of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium prognostic model: a population-based study.

Authors:  Daniel Y C Heng; Wanling Xie; Meredith M Regan; Lauren C Harshman; Georg A Bjarnason; Ulka N Vaishampayan; Mary Mackenzie; Lori Wood; Frede Donskov; Min-Han Tan; Sun-Young Rha; Neeraj Agarwal; Christian Kollmannsberger; Brian I Rini; Toni K Choueiri
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 10.  Triple-negative breast cancer: role of specific chemotherapy agents.

Authors:  Steven J Isakoff
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.360

View more
  2 in total

1.  BIPSE: A biomarker-based phase I/II design for immunotherapy trials with progression-free survival endpoint.

Authors:  Beibei Guo; Yong Zang
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 2.497

Review 2.  A Causal Framework for Making Individualized Treatment Decisions in Oncology.

Authors:  Pavlos Msaouel; Juhee Lee; Jose A Karam; Peter F Thall
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-14       Impact factor: 6.575

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.