Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32571298›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2020

Practicalities in running early-phase trials using the time-to-event continual reassessment method (TiTE-CRM) for interventions with long toxicity periods using two radiotherapy oncology trials as examples.

Erik van Werkhoven, Samantha Hinsley, Eleni Frangou, Jane Holmes, Rosemarie de Haan, Maria Hawkins, Sarah Brown, Sharon B Love

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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
  7. Adaptive Phase 1 Design in Radiation Therapy Trials.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Erik van WerkhovenNKI, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Samantha HinsleyCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Eleni FrangouMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, UCL, London, UK.
Jane HolmesCentre for Statistics in Medicine, NDORMS, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Rosemarie de HaanNKI, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Maria HawkinsCRUK MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Gray Laboratories, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sarah BrownClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Sharon B LoveMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, UCL, London, UK. s.love@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-6695-5390

Funding

Cancer Research UK 16895Cancer Research UK 20874Cancer Research UK 25355Cancer Research UK 27294Cancer Research UK C1348/A25355Cancer Research UK C49297/A27294Medical Research Council MC_UU_00001/2Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/24
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAwareness of model-based designs for dose-finding studies such as the Continual Reassessment Method (CRM) is now becoming more commonplace amongst clinicians, statisticians and trial management staff. In some settings toxicities can occur a long time after treatment has finished, resulting in extremely long, interrupted, CRM design trials. The Time-to-Event CRM (TiTE-CRM), a modification to the original CRM, accounts for the timing of late-onset toxicities and results in shorter trial duration. In this article, we discuss how to design and deliver a trial using this method, from the grant application stage through to dissemination, using two radiotherapy trials as examples.

methodsThe TiTE-CRM encapsulates the dose-toxicity relationship with a statistical model. The model incorporates observed toxicities and uses a weight to account for the proportion of completed follow-up of participants without toxicity. This model uses all available data to determine the next participant's dose and subsequently declare the maximum tolerated dose. We focus on two trials designed by the authors to illustrate practical issues when designing, setting up, and running such studies.

resultsIn setting up a TiTE-CRM trial, model parameters need to be defined and the time element involved might cause complications, therefore looking at operating characteristics through simulations is essential. At the grant application stage, we suggest resources to fund statisticians' time before funding is awarded and make recommendations for the level of detail to include in funding applications. While running the trial, close contact of all involved staff is required as a dose decision is made each time a participant is recruited. We suggest ways of capturing data in a timely manner and give example code in R for design and delivery of the trial. Finally, we touch upon dissemination issues while the trial is running and upon completion.

conclusionModel-based designs can be complex. We hope this paper will help clinical trial teams to demystify the conduct of TiTE-CRM trials and be a starting point for using this methodology in practice.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsResearch DesignAdaptive Clinical Trials as TopicDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansMaximum Tolerated DoseModels, StatisticalAdaptive trial designClinical trial designDose-findingLate toxicityPhase ITiTE-CRM

Identifiers

PMID32571298
PMCPMC7477911

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.