Search

We propose a design for dose finding for cytotoxic agents in completely or partially ordered groups of patients. By completely ordered groups, we mean that prior to the study, there is clinical information that would indicate that for a given dose, the groups can be ordered with respect to the probability of toxicity at that dose. With partially ordered groups, at a given dose, only some of the groups can be ordered with respect to the probability of toxicity at that dose. The method we propose includes elements of the parametric model used in the continual reassessment method combined with the Hwang-Peddada order-restricted estimation procedure. We evaluate the operating characteristics of these designs in a family of dose-toxicity curves representing complete and partial orders. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We propose a new design for dose finding for cytotoxic agents in two ordered groups of patients. By ordered groups, we mean that prior to the study there is clinical information that would indicate that for a given dose one group would be more susceptible to toxicities than patients in the other group. The designs are evaluated relative to two previously proposed designs for ordered groups over a range of scenarios generated randomly from a family of dose-toxicity curves. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the problem of identifying the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in Phase I dose-finding clinical trials with late-onset toxicities. The main design challenge is how best to adaptively allocate study participants to tolerable doses when the evaluation window for the toxicity endpoint is long relative to the accrual rate of new participants. We propose a new design framework based on order-restricted statistical inference that addresses this challenge in sequential dose assignments. We illustrate the proposed method on real data from a Phase I trial of bortezomib in lymphoma patients and apply it to a Phase I trial of radiotherapy in prostate cancer patients. We conduct extensive simulation studies to compare our design's operating characteristics to existing published methods. Overall, our proposed design demonstrates good performance relative to existing methods in allocating participants at and around the MTD during the study and accurately recommending the MTD at the study conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In studies of combinations of agents in phase I oncology trials, the dose-toxicity relationship may not be monotone for all combinations, in which case the toxicity probabilities follow a partial order. The continual reassessment method for partial orders (PO-CRM) is a design for phase I trials of combinations that leans upon identifying possible complete orders associated with the partial order. This article addresses some practical design considerations not previously undertaken when describing the PO-CRM. We describe an approach in choosing a proper subset of possible orderings, formulated according to the known toxicity relationships within a matrix of combination therapies. Other design issues, such as working model selection and stopping rules, are also discussed. We demonstrate the practical ability of PO-CRM as a phase I design for combinations through its use in a recent trial designed at the University of Virginia Cancer Center. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary Much of the statistical methodology underlying the experimental design of phase 1 trials in oncology is intended for studies involving a single cytotoxic agent. The goal of these studies is to estimate the maximally tolerated dose, the highest dose that can be administered with an acceptable level of toxicity. A fundamental assumption of these methods is monotonicity of the dose-toxicity curve. This is a reasonable assumption for single-agent trials in which the administration of greater doses of the agent can be expected to produce dose-limiting toxicities in increasing proportions of patients. When studying multiple agents, the assumption may not hold because the ordering of the toxicity probabilities could possibly be unknown for several of the available drug combinations. At the same time, some of the orderings are known and so we describe the whole situation as that of a partial ordering. In this article, we propose a new two-dimensional dose-finding method for multiple-agent trials that simplifies to the continual reassessment method (CRM), introduced by (1990, Biometrics 46, 33-48), when the ordering is fully known. This design enables us to relax the assumption of a monotonic dose-toxicity curve. We compare our approach and some simulation results to a CRM design in which the ordering is known as well as to other suggestions for partial orders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Phase I trials of cytotoxic agents in oncology are usually dose-finding studies that involve a single cytotoxic agent. Many statistical methods have been proposed for these trials, all of which are based on the assumption of a monotonic dose–toxicity curve. For single-agent trials, this is a valid assumption. In many trials, however, investigators are interested in finding the maximally tolerated dose based on escalating multiple cytotoxic agents. When there are multiple agents, monotonicity of the dose–toxicity curve is not clearly defined. In this article we present a design for phase I trials in which the toxicity probabilities follow a partial order, meaning that there are pairs of treatments for which the ordering of the toxicity probabilities is not known at the start of the trial. We compare the new design to existing methods for simple orders and investigate the properties of the design for two partial orders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Toxicity probability interval designs have received increasing attention as a dose-finding method in recent years. In this study, we compared the two-stage, likelihood-based continual reassessment method (CRM), modified toxicity probability interval (mTPI), and the Bayesian optimal interval design (BOIN) in order to evaluate each method's performance in dose selection for phase I trials. We use several summary measures to compare the performance of these methods, including percentage of correct selection (PCS) of the true maximum tolerable dose (MTD), allocation of patients to doses at and around the true MTD, and an accuracy index. This index is an efficiency measure that describes the entire distribution of MTD selection and patient allocation by taking into account the distance between the true probability of toxicity at each dose level and the target toxicity rate. The simulation study considered a broad range of toxicity curves and various sample sizes. When considering PCS, we found that CRM outperformed the two competing methods in most scenarios, followed by BOIN, then mTPI. We observed a similar trend when considering the accuracy index for dose allocation, where CRM most often outperformed both mTPI and BOIN. These trends were more pronounced with increasing number of dose levels. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adaptive, model-based, dose-finding methods, such as the continual reassessment method, have been shown to have good operating characteristics. One school of thought argues in favor of the use of parsimonious models, not modeling all aspects of the problem, and using a strict minimum number of parameters. In particular, for the standard situation of a single homogeneous group, it is common to appeal to a one-parameter model. Other authors argue for a more classical approach that models all aspects of the problem. Here, we show that increasing the dimension of the parameter space, in the context of adaptive dose-finding studies, is usually counter productive and, rather than leading to improvements in operating characteristics, the added dimensionality is likely to result in difficulties. Among these are inconsistency of parameter estimates, lack of coherence in escalation or de-escalation, erratic behavior, getting stuck at the wrong level, and, in almost all cases, poorer performance in terms of correct identification of the targeted dose. Our conclusions are based on both theoretical results and simulations. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Operating characteristics for proposed clinical trial designs provide insight into performance regarding safety and accuracy, allowing the study team and review entities to determine the design's suitability to achieve the study's proposed objectives. Advances in cancer therapeutics have augmented the needs of early phase clinical trial design. Additionally, advances in research on early-phase trial design have led to the availability of a wide range of methods that show vast improvement over outdated approaches. Three trials utilizing variations of the 3 + 3 decision rule are discussed. The protocols lacked detail, including operating characteristics and guidance for decision-making that deviated from the 3 + 3 decision rule and MTD determination. We provide a discussion of the statistical issues associated with each design and operating characteristics for the proposed design compared to alternatives better suited to achieve the aims of each trial. Our results illustrate how operating characteristics inform a design's safety and accuracy. Operating characteristics can unmask poor behavior, such as a high percentage of particiapnts exposed to overly toxic doses, a low probability of correctly identifying the MTD, and inappropriate early study termination. Selection of early-phase trial design has significant implications on a trial's ability to meet its objectives. Operating characteristics are a necessary component in the design and review of a protocol, determining if the study's objectives can be achieved and documenting the study's scientific validity. Continued use of outdated approaches due to historical acceptance hinders scientific rigor and the effort to move effective agents through the drug development process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, there are no clinically approved treatments for ischemia-reperfusion injury after lung transplantation. Pre-clinical animal models have demonstrated a promising efficacy of adenosine 2A receptor (A 2A R) agonists as a treatment option for reducing ischemia-reperfusion injury. The purpose of this human study, is to conduct a Phase I clinical trial for evaluating the safety of continuous infusion of an A 2A R agonist in lung transplant recipients. An adaptive, two-stage continual reassessment trial was designed to evaluate the safety of regadenoson (A 2A R agonist) in the setting of lung transplantation. Continuous infusion of regadenoson was administered to lung transplant recipients that was started at the time of skin incision. Adverse events and dose-limiting toxicities, as pre-determined by a study team and assessed by a clinical team and an independent safety monitor, were the primary end-points for safety in this trial. Between January 2018 and March 2019, 14 recipients were enrolled in the trial. Of these, 10 received the maximum infused dose of 1.44 µg/kg/min for 12 hours. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The steady-state plasma regadenoson levels sampled before the reperfusion of the first lung were 0.98 ± 0.46 ng/ml. There were no mortalities within 30 days. Regadenoson, an A 2A R agonist, can be safely infused in the setting of lung transplantation with no dose-limiting toxicities or drug-related mortality. Although not powered for the evaluation of secondary end-points, the results of this trial and the outcome of pre-clinical studies warrant further investigation with a Phase II randomized controlled trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to determine whether a dopamine agonist could improve mental status among children in a low-response state following traumatic brain injury. In an 8-week, prospective, double-blind, randomized trial, 10 children and adolescents ages 8 to 21 years (X = 16.7 years) with traumatic brain injury sustained at least 1 month previously and remaining in a low-response state (Rancho Los Amigos Scale level ≤ 3) received pramipexole or amantadine. Medication dosage was increased over 4 weeks, weaned over 2 weeks, and then discontinued. At baseline and weekly during the study, subjects were evaluated with the Coma Near Coma Scale, Western NeuroSensory Stimulation Profile, and Disability Rating Scale. Scores improved significantly from baseline to the medication phase on the Coma Near Coma Scale, Western NeuroSensory Stimulation Profile, and Disability Rating Scale (P < .005). The weekly rate of change was significantly better for all three measures on medication than off medication (P < .05). Rancho Los Amigos Scale levels improved significantly on medication as well (P < .05). There was no difference in efficacy between amantadine and pramipexole. No unexpected or significant side effects were observed with either drug This clinical trial supports the benefit of two dopamine agonists in the restoration of functional arousal, awareness, and communication. These drugs can be helpful in accelerating eligibility for acute rehabilitation among children and adolescents who have sustained significant brain injuries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]