ArticleJAMA network open2020
Model of a Queuing Approach for Patient Accrual in Phase 1 Oncology Studies.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Phase II Clinical Trial of Pembrolizumab and Enobosarm in Patients with Androgen Receptor-Positive Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.The oncologist · 2021Trial
- TrialTriage, a Semiautonomous Prescreening Workflow for Resolving Ambiguity in Phase I Oncology Trial Eligibility: Development and Proof-of-Concept Study Using Synthetic Cases.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Multicenter dose de-escalation phase I trial of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) nab-paclitaxel and cisplatin in combination with systemic nab-paclitaxel in recurrent ovarian cancer patients: trial in progress.Pleura and peritoneum · 2026Article
- A phase 1 study of blinatumomab/lenalidomide in relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphoma: toxicity, efficacy, and correlative analysis.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Cisplatin and Doxorubicin Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosolized Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in Patients with Ovarian Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases: A Multicenter US Phase I Trial.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Safety of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy in biliary cancer patients with peritoneal metastases.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) experience in patients with recurrent low grade serous ovarian carcinoma (LGSOC): sub-cohort report of phase 1 clinical trial.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Oxaliplatin Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosolized Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in Colorectal and Appendiceal Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases: Results of a Multicenter Phase I Trial in the USA.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Immunogenicity and efficacy of pembrolizumab and doxorubicin in a phase I trial for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2023Article
- Phase I Trial of Ipatasertib Plus Carboplatin, Carboplatin/Paclitaxel, or Capecitabine and Atezolizumab in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Ethics and Clinical Research: Improving Transparency and Informed Consent in Phase I Oncology Trials.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Explicit underdose control based on toxicity: Four points to consider.Statistics in medicine · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Phase 1 cancer studies, which guide dose selection for subsequent studies, are almost 3 times more prevalent than phase 3 studies and have a median study duration considerably longer than 2 years, which constitutes a major component of drug development time. Objective: To discern a method to reduce the duration of phase 1 studies in adult and pediatric cancer studies without violating risk limits by better accommodating the accrual and evaluation process (or queue). Design: The process modeled, the phase 1 queue (IQ), includes patient interarrival time, screening, and dose-limiting toxicity evaluation. For this proof of principle, the rules of the 3 + 3 and rolling 6 phase 1 designs were modified to improve patient flow through the queue without exceeding the maximum risk permitted in the parent designs. The resulting designs, the IQ 3 + 3 and the IQ rolling 6, were each compared with their parent design by simulations in 12 different scenarios. Main Outcomes and Measures: (1) The time from study opening to determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), (2) the number of patients treated to determine the MTD, and (3) the association of the design with the dose selected as the MTD. Results: Based on 800 simulations, for all 12 scenarios considered, the IQ 3 + 3 and the IQ rolling 6 designs were associated with reduced expected study durations compared with the parent design. The expected IQ 3 + 3 reduction ranged from 1.6 to 10.4 months (with 3.7 months for the standard scenario), and the expected reduction associated with IQ rolling 6 ranged from 0.4 to 10.5 months (with 3.4 months for the standard scenario). The increase in the mean number of patients treated in the IQ 3 + 3 compared with the 3 + 3 ranged from 0.6 to 3.2 patients. No increase in the number of patients was associated with the IQ rolling 6 compared with the rolling 6 design. The probability of selecting a dose level as the MTD changed by less than 3% for all dose levels and scenarios in both parent designs. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that IQ designs were associated with reduced mean duration of phase 1 studies compared with their parent designs without changing the risk limits or MTD selection operating characteristics. These approaches have been successfully implemented in both hematology and solid tumor phase 1 studies.
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.