ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2011
Continual reassessment method with multiple toxicity constraints.
Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Isotonic Phase I cancer clinical trial design utilizing patient-reported outcomes.Statistics in biopharmaceutical research · 2025Article
- Dose Finding in Oncology Trials Guided by Ordinal Toxicity Grades Using Continuous Dose Levels.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- MC-Keyboard: A Practical Phase I Trial Design for Targeted Therapies and Immunotherapies Integrating Multiple-Grade Toxicities.Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2024Article
- Statistical and practical considerations in planning and conduct of dose-optimization trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2024Review
- A generalized calibrated Bayesian hierarchical modeling approach to basket trials with multiple endpoints.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2024Article
- MT-Keyboard: A Bayesian Model-assisted Interval Design to Account for Toxicity Grades and Types for Phase I Trials.Statistics in biopharmaceutical research · 2024Article
- Application of the patient-reported outcomes continual reassessment method to a phase I study of radiotherapy in endometrial cancer.The international journal of biostatistics · 2023Article
- Mathematical Modelling for Optimal Vaccine Dose Finding: Maximising Efficacy and Minimising Toxicity.Vaccines · 2022Article
- Bayesian modeling of a bivariate toxicity outcome for early phase oncology trials evaluating dose regimens.Statistics in medicine · 2021Article
- A Bayesian dose-finding design for outcomes evaluated with uncertainty.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2021Article
- Designing Dose-Finding Phase I Clinical Trials: Top 10 Questions That Should Be Discussed With Your Statistician.JCO precision oncology · 2021Article
- Adding flexibility to clinical trial designs: an example-based guide to the practical use of adaptive designs.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- Incorporating patient-reported outcomes in dose-finding clinical trials.Statistics in medicine · 2020Article
- Improvements to the Escalation with Overdose Control design and a comparison with the restricted Continual Reassessment Method.Pharmaceutical statistics · 2019Article
- How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
- Dose-finding designs for cumulative toxicities using multiple constraints.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Modeling adverse event counts in phase I clinical trials of a cytotoxic agent.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2018Article
- Phase I Designs that Allow for Uncertainty in the Attribution of Adverse Events.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics · 2017Article
- Dose-finding designs for trials of molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapies.Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics · 2017Article
- Multivariate Markov models for the conditional probability of toxicity in phase II trials.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper addresses the dose-finding problem in cancer trials in which we are concerned with the gradation of severe toxicities that are considered dose limiting. In order to differentiate the tolerance for different toxicity types and grades, we propose a novel extension of the continual reassessment method that explicitly accounts for multiple toxicity constraints. We apply the proposed methods to redesign a bortezomib trial in lymphoma patients and compare their performance with that of the existing methods. Based on simulations, our proposed methods achieve comparable accuracy in identifying the maximum tolerated dose but have better control of the erroneous allocation and recommendation of an overdose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.