Literature DB >> 7997713

A comparison of two phase I trial designs.

E L Korn1, D Midthune, T T Chen, L V Rubinstein, M C Christian, R M Simon.   

Abstract

Phase I cancer chemotherapy trials are designed to determine rapidly the maximum tolerated dose of a new agent for further study. A recently proposed Bayesian method, the continual reassessment method, has been suggested to offer an improvement over the standard design of such trials. We find the previous comparisons did not completely address the relative performance of the designs as they would be used in practice. Our results indicate that with the continual reassessment method, more patients will be treated at very high doses and the trials will take longer to complete. We offer some suggested improvements to both the standard design and the Bayesian method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7997713     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780131802

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  43 in total

Review 1.  Learning from previous responses in phase I dose-escalation studies.

Authors:  J Whitehead; Y Zhou; N Stallard; S Todd; A Whitehead
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  A new statistical method for dose-finding based on efficacy and toxicity in early phase clinical trials.

Authors:  P F Thall; E H Estey; H G Sung
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 3.850

3.  Statistical Methods for Selecting Maximum Effective Dose and Evaluating Treatment Effect When Dose - Response is Monotonic.

Authors:  Maiying Kong; Shesh N Rai; Roberto Bolli
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 1.452

4.  A simulation-based comparison of the traditional method, Rolling-6 design and a frequentist version of the continual reassessment method with special attention to trial duration in pediatric Phase I oncology trials.

Authors:  Arzu Onar-Thomas; Zang Xiong
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 2.226

Review 5.  Phase I trials in paediatric oncology--the European perspective. The New Agents Group of the United Kingdom Childrens Cancer Study Group.

Authors:  E J Estlin; S Ablett; D R Newell; I J Lewis; L Lashford; A D Pearson
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 3.850

6.  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

7.  Bayesian Optimal Interval Design: A Simple and Well-Performing Design for Phase I Oncology Trials.

Authors:  Ying Yuan; Kenneth R Hess; Susan G Hilsenbeck; Mark R Gilbert
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 12.531

8.  Advancing Clinical Trials to Streamline Drug Development.

Authors:  Susan E Bates; Donald A Berry; Sanjeeve Balasubramaniam; Stuart Bailey; Patricia M LoRusso; Eric H Rubin
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Bayesian adaptive designs in single ascending dose trials in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  David Guédé; Bruno Reigner; Francois Vandenhende; Mike Derks; Ulrich Beyer; Paul Jordan; Eric Worth; Cheikh Diack; Nicolas Frey; Richard Peck
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.335

10.  A population-based clinical trial of irinotecan and Carboplatin.

Authors:  Derick Lau; Minh Huynh; Jewel Johl
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 4.375

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.