Cargando…
Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs
An objective of phase I dose‐finding trials is to find the maximum tolerated dose; the dose with a particular risk of toxicity. Frequently, this risk is assessed across the first cycle of therapy. However, in oncology, a course of treatment frequently consists of multiple cycles of therapy. In many...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092569/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36250912 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.9593 |
_version_ | 1785023377054892032 |
---|---|
author | Barnett, Helen Boix, Oliver Kontos, Dimitris Jaki, Thomas |
author_facet | Barnett, Helen Boix, Oliver Kontos, Dimitris Jaki, Thomas |
author_sort | Barnett, Helen |
collection | PubMed |
description | An objective of phase I dose‐finding trials is to find the maximum tolerated dose; the dose with a particular risk of toxicity. Frequently, this risk is assessed across the first cycle of therapy. However, in oncology, a course of treatment frequently consists of multiple cycles of therapy. In many cases, the overall risk of toxicity for a given treatment is not fully encapsulated by observations from the first cycle, and hence it is advantageous to include toxicity outcomes from later cycles in phase I trials. Extending the follow up period in a trial naturally extends the total length of the trial which is undesirable. We present a comparison of eight methods that incorporate late onset toxicities while not extensively extending the trial length. We conduct simulation studies over a number of scenarios and in two settings; the first setting with minimal stopping rules and the second setting with a full set of standard stopping rules expected in such a dose finding study. We find that the model‐based approaches in general outperform the model‐assisted approaches, with an interval censored approach and a modified version of the time‐to‐event continual reassessment method giving the most promising overall performance in terms of correct selections and trial length. Further recommendations are made for the implementation of such methods. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10092569 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100925692023-04-13 Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs Barnett, Helen Boix, Oliver Kontos, Dimitris Jaki, Thomas Stat Med Research Articles An objective of phase I dose‐finding trials is to find the maximum tolerated dose; the dose with a particular risk of toxicity. Frequently, this risk is assessed across the first cycle of therapy. However, in oncology, a course of treatment frequently consists of multiple cycles of therapy. In many cases, the overall risk of toxicity for a given treatment is not fully encapsulated by observations from the first cycle, and hence it is advantageous to include toxicity outcomes from later cycles in phase I trials. Extending the follow up period in a trial naturally extends the total length of the trial which is undesirable. We present a comparison of eight methods that incorporate late onset toxicities while not extensively extending the trial length. We conduct simulation studies over a number of scenarios and in two settings; the first setting with minimal stopping rules and the second setting with a full set of standard stopping rules expected in such a dose finding study. We find that the model‐based approaches in general outperform the model‐assisted approaches, with an interval censored approach and a modified version of the time‐to‐event continual reassessment method giving the most promising overall performance in terms of correct selections and trial length. Further recommendations are made for the implementation of such methods. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2022-10-17 2022-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10092569/ /pubmed/36250912 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.9593 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Barnett, Helen Boix, Oliver Kontos, Dimitris Jaki, Thomas Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs |
title | Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs |
title_full | Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs |
title_fullStr | Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs |
title_full_unstemmed | Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs |
title_short | Dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: A comparison study of designs |
title_sort | dose finding studies for therapies with late‐onset toxicities: a comparison study of designs |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092569/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36250912 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.9593 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT barnetthelen dosefindingstudiesfortherapieswithlateonsettoxicitiesacomparisonstudyofdesigns AT boixoliver dosefindingstudiesfortherapieswithlateonsettoxicitiesacomparisonstudyofdesigns AT kontosdimitris dosefindingstudiesfortherapieswithlateonsettoxicitiesacomparisonstudyofdesigns AT jakithomas dosefindingstudiesfortherapieswithlateonsettoxicitiesacomparisonstudyofdesigns |