Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31856600›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2020

Designing and evaluating dose-escalation studies made easy: The MoDEsT web app.

Philip Pallmann, Fang Wan, Adrian P Mander, Graham M Wheeler, Christina Yap, Sally Clive, Lisa V Hampson, Thomas Jaki

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Philip PallmannCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical & Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8274-9696
Fang WanDepartment of Mathematics & Statistics, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Adrian P ManderCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical & Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Graham M WheelerMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Christina YapCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6715-2514
Sally CliveEdinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
Lisa V HampsonStatistical Methodology, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Thomas JakiDepartment of Mathematics & Statistics, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1096-188X
Lancaster University · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit · GBCardiff University · GBNovartis (Switzerland) · CHWestern General Hospital · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15954Cancer Research UK 25350Cancer Research UK 25354Cancer Research UK C22436/A15958Medical Research Council MR/J014079/1Medical Research Council MR/K025635/1Medical Research Council MR/L004933/1Medical Research Council MR/L004933/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsDose-escalation studies are essential in the early stages of developing novel treatments, when the aim is to find a safe dose for administration in humans. Despite their great importance, many dose-escalation studies use study designs based on heuristic algorithms with well-documented drawbacks. Bayesian decision procedures provide a design alternative that is conceptually simple and methodologically sound, but very rarely used in practice, at least in part due to their perceived statistical complexity. There are currently very few easily accessible software implementations that would facilitate their application.

methodsWe have created MoDEsT, a free and easy-to-use web application for designing and conducting single-agent dose-escalation studies with a binary toxicity endpoint, where the objective is to estimate the maximum tolerated dose. MoDEsT uses a well-established Bayesian decision procedure based on logistic regression. The software has a user-friendly point-and-click interface, makes changes visible in real time, and automatically generates a range of graphs, tables, and reports. It is aimed at clinicians as well as statisticians with limited expertise in model-based dose-escalation designs, and does not require any statistical programming skills to evaluate the operating characteristics of, or implement, the Bayesian dose-escalation design.

resultsMoDEsT comes in two parts: a 'Design' module to explore design options and simulate their operating characteristics, and a 'Conduct' module to guide the dose-finding process throughout the study. We illustrate the practical use of both modules with data from a real phase I study in terminal cancer.

conclusionEnabling both methodologists and clinicians to understand and apply model-based study designs with ease is a key factor towards their routine use in early-phase studies. We hope that MoDEsT will enable incorporation of Bayesian decision procedures for dose escalation at the earliest stage of clinical trial design, thus increasing their use in early-phase trials.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials, Phase I as TopicMaximum Tolerated DoseResearch DesignSoftwareAlgorithmsAntioxidantsBayes TheoremDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansLogistic ModelsNeoplasmsQuercetinUser-Computer InterfaceAntioxidantsQuercetinBayesian statisticsdose-finding studygraphical user interfacelogistic modelPhase I clinical trialR softwareshiny app

Identifiers

PMID31856600
PMCPMC7227124
OpenAlexW2983657182

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.