Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30112806›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical statistics2018

Subgroup-specific dose finding in phase I clinical trials based on time to toxicity allowing adaptive subgroup combination.

Andrew G Chapple, Peter F Thall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical statistics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A Road Map for Designing Phase I Clinical Trials of Radiotherapy-Novel Agent Combinations.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2022
    Review
  10. Innovative trial design in precision oncology.Seminars in cancer biology · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Adaptive Enrichment Designs in Clinical Trials.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrew G ChappleDepartment of Statistics, Rice University, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0001-5332-2730
Peter F ThallDepartment of Biostatistics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-7293-529X

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
THE THERAPY OF AMLP01CA055164 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI THOMAS, MATTIE J · 1992 to 2011
$25.3M
Training Program in Biostatistics for Cancer ResearchT32CA096520 · NCI · RICE UNIVERSITY · PI KIMMEL, MAREK, YUAN, YING · 2003 to 2023
$4.5M
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR COMPLEX CANCER TRIALSR01CA083932 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI THALL, PETER F · 2000 to 2017
$2.3M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA055164NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS P30CA 016672NCI NIH HHS R01 CA083932NCI NIH HHS R01 CA 83932NCI NIH HHS T32 CA096520NIH HHS 5T32-CA096520-07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A Bayesian design is presented that does precision dose finding based on time to toxicity in a phase I clinical trial with two or more patient subgroups. The design, called Sub-TITE, makes sequentially adaptive subgroup-specific decisions while possibly combining subgroups that have similar estimated dose-toxicity curves. Decisions are based on posterior quantities computed under a logistic regression model for the probability of toxicity within a fixed follow-up period, as a function of dose and subgroup. Similarly to the time-to-event continual reassessment method (TITE-CRM, Cheung and Chappell), the Sub-TITE design downweights each patient's likelihood contribution using a function of follow-up time. Spike-and-slab priors are assumed for subgroup parameters, with latent subgroup combination variables included in the logistic model to allow different subgroups to be combined for dose finding if they are homogeneous. This framework can be used in trials where clinicians have identified patient subgroups but are not certain whether they will have different dose-toxicity curves. A simulation study shows that, when the dose-toxicity curves differ between all subgroups, Sub-TITE has superior performance compared with applying the TITE-CRM while ignoring subgroups and has slightly better performance than applying the TITE-CRM separately within subgroups or using the two-group maximum likelihood approach of Salter et al that borrows strength among the two groups. When two or more subgroups are truly homogeneous but differ from other subgroups, the Sub-TITE design is substantially superior to either ignoring subgroups, running separate trials within all subgroups, or the maximum likelihood approach of Salter et al. Practical guidelines and computer software are provided to facilitate application.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials, Phase I as TopicResearch DesignBayes TheoremDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansLogistic ModelsBayesian methodsclinical trialsdose finding

Identifiers

PMID30112806
PMCPMC6640643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.