ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2013
Adaptive designs for dual-agent phase I dose-escalation studies.
Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed.
- CONSORT-DEFINE explanation and elaboration: recommendations for enhancing reporting quality and impact of early phase dose-finding clinical trials.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- SPIRIT-DEFINE explanation and elaboration: recommendations for enhancing quality and impact of early phase dose-finding clinical trials protocols.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- A new function for drug combination dose finding trials.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Development of consensus-driven SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions for early phase dose-finding trials: the DEFINE study.BMC medicine · 2023Review
- Evaluation of phase I clinical trial designs for combinational agents along with guidance based on simulation studies.Journal of applied statistics · 2023Review
- Accuracy and Safety of Novel Designs for Phase I Drug-Combination Oncology Trials.Statistics in biopharmaceutical research · 2022Article
- Adding flexibility to clinical trial designs: an example-based guide to the practical use of adaptive designs.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- Proportion of Patients in Phase I Oncology Trials Receiving Treatments That Are Ultimately Approved.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2020Article
- A Bayesian model-free approach to combination therapy phase I trials using censored time-to-toxicity data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics · 2019Article
- How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
- Design considerations for early-phase clinical trials of immune-oncology agents.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2018Article
- Model-Based Adaptive Optimal Design (MBAOD) Improves Combination Dose Finding Designs: an Example in Oncology.The AAPS journal · 2018Article
- From Famine to Feast: Developing Early-Phase Combination Immunotherapy Trials Wisely.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2017Article
- Toxicity-dependent feasibility bounds for the escalation with overdose control approach in phase I cancer trials.Statistics in medicine · 2017Article
- Spotlight on landmark oncology trials: the latest evidence and novel trial designs.BMC medicine · 2017Article
- Modelling semi-attributable toxicity in dual-agent phase I trials with non-concurrent drug administration.Statistics in medicine · 2017Article
- Identifying a maximum tolerated contour in two-dimensional dose finding.Statistics in medicine · 2017Article
- A curve-free Bayesian decision-theoretic design for two-agent Phase I trials.Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics · 2017Article
- Approaches to modernize the combination drug development paradigm.Genome medicine · 2016Review
- Phase I study of pemetrexed with sorafenib in advanced solid tumors.Oncotarget · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Anticancer agents used in combination are fundamental to successful cancer treatment, particularly in a curative setting. For dual-agent phase I trials, the goal is to identify drug doses and schedules for further clinical testing. However, current methods for establishing the recommended phase II dose for agents in combination can fail to fully explore drug interactions. With increasing numbers of anticancer drugs requiring testing, new adaptive model-based trial designs that improve on current practice have been proposed, although uptake has been minimal. We describe the methods available and discuss some of the opportunities and challenges faced in dual-agent phase I trials, as well as giving examples of trials in which adaptive designs have been implemented successfully. Improving the design and execution of phase I trials of drug combinations critically relies on collaboration between the statistical and clinical communities to facilitate the implementation of adaptive, model-based designs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23507740What 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.