Literature DB >> 9699228

An evaluation of phase I cancer clinical trial designs.

C Ahn1.   

Abstract

Phase I clinical trials are designed to identify an appropriate dose for experimentation in phase II and III studies. I present the results from a simulation study to evaluate the performance of nine phase I designs involving the standard design, the two-stage modified Storer's design, the two-stage Korn's design, the one-stage modified continual reassessment method (CRM) designs, and the two-stage modified CRM designs. I compare the performance of the above phase I designs in terms of the following criteria: (i) the proportion of the recommended maximum tolerated dose (MTD) at each dose level; (ii) the proportion of patients treated at each dose level; (iii) the average number of patients to complete the trial; (iv) the probability of toxicity observed; and (v) the average number of cohorts to complete the trial. In general, the one-stage modified CRM II and CRM III designs perform well compared with the other designs considered in this study. The one-stage modified CRM II and III designs require much fewer numbers of cohorts than do the two-stage modified CRM II and III designs. The one-stage modified CRM II and III designs avoid the criticisms of the original CRM by reducing the average number of cohorts and toxicity incidences, while estimating the MTD more accurately than does the standard design.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9699228     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19980730)17:14<1537::aid-sim872>3.0.co;2-f

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


  20 in total

Review 1.  Adaptive dose-finding studies: a review of model-guided phase I clinical trials.

Authors:  Alexia Iasonos; John O'Quigley
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  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

3.  The superiority of the time-to-event continual reassessment method to the rolling six design in pediatric oncology Phase I trials.

Authors:  Lili Zhao; Julia Lee; Rajen Mody; Thomas M Braun
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2011-05-24       Impact factor: 2.486

4.  Estimating the dose-toxicity curve in completed phase I studies.

Authors:  Alexia Iasonos; Irina Ostrovnaya
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Proportional odds model for dose-finding clinical trial designs with ordinal toxicity grading.

Authors:  Emily M Van Meter; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; Dipankar Bandyopadhyay
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  A hierarchical Bayesian design for phase I trials of novel combinations of cancer therapeutic agents.

Authors:  Thomas M Braun; Shufang Wang
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Continual reassessment and related designs in dose-finding studies.

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

8.  Phase I trial of a novel anti-GD2 monoclonal antibody, Hu14.18K322A, designed to decrease toxicity in children with refractory or recurrent neuroblastoma.

Authors:  Fariba Navid; Paul M Sondel; Raymond Barfield; Barry L Shulkin; Robert A Kaufman; Jim A Allay; Jacek Gan; Paul Hutson; Songwon Seo; Kyungmann Kim; Jacob Goldberg; Jacquelyn A Hank; Catherine A Billups; Jianrong Wu; Wayne L Furman; Lisa M McGregor; Mario Otto; Stephen D Gillies; Rupert Handgretinger; Victor M Santana
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-04-07       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Theoretical and practical application of traditional and accelerated titration Phase I clinical trial designs: the Wayne State University experience.

Authors:  Elisabeth I Heath; Patricia M LoRusso; S Percy Ivy; Larry Rubinstein; Michaele C Christian; Lance K Heilbrun
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.051

10.  Sample size formulae for the Bayesian continual reassessment method.

Authors:  Ying Kuen Cheung
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 2.486

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.