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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barnett, Helen, Boix, Oliver, Kontos, Dimitris, Jaki, Thomas
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