Early completion of phase I cancer clinical trials with Bayesian optimal interval design.
Bayesian optimal interval design
early completion
model-assisted design
model-based design
Journal
Statistics in medicine
ISSN: 1097-0258
Titre abrégé: Stat Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8215016
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 06 2021
30 06 2021
Historique:
revised:
01
01
2021
received:
28
08
2020
accepted:
06
01
2021
pubmed:
13
4
2021
medline:
30
6
2021
entrez:
12
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Phase I cancer clinical trials have been proposed novel designs such as algorithm-based, model-based, and model-assisted designs. Model-based and model-assisted designs have a higher identification rate of maximum tolerated dose (MTD) than algorithm-based designs, but are limited by the fact that the sample size is fixed. Hence, it would be very attractive to estimate the MTD with sufficient accuracy and complete the trial early. O'Quigley proposed the early completion of a trial with the continual reassessment method among model-based designs when the MTD is estimated with sufficient accuracy. However, the proposed early completion method based on the binary outcome trees has a problem that the calculation cost is high when the number of remaining patients is large. Among model-assisted designs, the Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design provides the simplest approach for dose adjustment. We propose the novel early completion method for the clinical trials with the BOIN design when the MTD is estimated with sufficient accuracy. This completion method can be easily calculated. In addition, the method does not require many more patients treated for the determination of early completion. We confirm that the BOIN design applying the early completion method has almost the same MTD identification rate compared to the BOIN design through simulations conducted based on over 30 000 scenarios.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3215-3226Informations de copyright
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Références
O'Quigley J. Continual reassessment designs with early termination. Biostatistics. 2002;3(1):87-99.
Crowley J, Hoering A. Handbook of Statistics in Clinical Oncology. 3rd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2012.
Yan F, Mandrekar S, Yuan Y. Keyboard: a novel Bayesian toxicity probability interval design for phase I clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(15):3994-4003.
Storer B. Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials. Biometrics. 1989;45:925-937.
Simon R, Freidlin B, Rubinstein L, Arbuck S, Collins J, Christian M. Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical trials in oncology. J Nat Cancer Inst. 1997;89(15):1138-1147.
Rogatko A, Schoeneck D, Jonas W, Tighiouart M, Khuri F, Porter A. Translation of innovative designs Into phase I trials. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(31):4982-4986.
Lasonos A, Wilton A, Riedel E, Seshan V, Spriggs D. A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in phase I dose-finding studies. Clin Trials. 2008;5:465-477.
Le Tourneau C, Lee J, Siu L. Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Nat Cancer Inst. 2009;101:708-720.
Ji Y, Liu P, Li Y, Bekele B. A modified toxicity probability interval method for dose-finding trials. Clin Trials. 2010;7(6):653-663.
Yuan Y, Hess K, Hilsenbeck S, Gilbert M. Bayesian optimal interval design: a simple and well-performing design for phase I oncology trials. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(17):4291-4301.
O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics. 1990;46:33-48.
Babb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S. Cancer phase I clinical trials: efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat Med. 1998;17:1103-1120.
Cheung Y, Chappell R. Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late-onset toxicities. Biometrics. 2000;56:1177-1182.
Braun T. The bivariate continual reassessment method: extending the CRM to phase I trials of two competing outcomes. Controll Clin Trials. 2002;23:240-256.
Lee S, Cheung Y. Model calibration in the continual reassessment method. Clin Trials. 2009;6(3):227-238.
Yin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method in phase I clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc. 2009;104(487):954-968.
Lee S, Cheung Y. Calibration of prior variance in the Bayesian continual reassessment method. Stat Med. 2011;30(17):2081-2089.
Wages N, Conaway M, O'Quigley J. Continual reassessment method for partial ordering. Biometrics. 2011;67:1555-1563.
Liu S, Yin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian data augmentation dose finding with continual reassessment method and delayed toxicity. Ann Appl Stat. 2013;7(4):2138-2156.
Liu S, Yuan Y. Bayesian optimal interval designs for phase I clinical trials. J Royal Stat Soc Appl Stat Ser C. 2015;64(Part 3):507-523.
Mu R, Yuan Y, Xu J, Mandrekar S, Yin J. gBOIN: a unified model-assisted phase I trial design accounting for toxicity grades, and binary or continuous end points. J Royal Stat Soc Appl Stat Ser C. 2019;68(2):289-308.
Lin R, Yin G. STEIN: a simple toxicity and efficacy interval design for seamless phase I/II clinical trials. Stat Med. 2017;36:4106-4120.
Lin R, Yin G. Bayesian optimal interval design for dose finding in drug-combination trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 2017;26(5):2155-2167.
Takeda K, Taguri M, Morita S. BOIN-ET: Bayesian optimal interval design for dose finding based on both efficacy and toxicity outcomes. Pharmaceut Stat. 2018;17:383-395.
Pan H, Lin R, Zhou Y, Yuan Y. Keyboard design for phase I drug-combination trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2020;92(1-13):1-11.
Horton B, Wages N, Conaway M. Performance of toxicity probability interval based designs in contrast to the continual reassessment method. Stat Med. 2017;I(36):291-300.
Zhou H, Murray T, Pan H, Yuan Y. Comparative review of novel model-assisted designs for phase I clinical trials. Stat Med. 2018;37:2208-2222.
Zohar S, Chevret S. The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies. Stat Med. 2001;20:2827-2843.
Paoletti X, O'Quigley J, Maccario J. Design efficiency in dose finding studies. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2004;45:197-214.