ReviewClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2023
Novel Clinical Trial Designs with Dose Optimization to Improve Long-term Outcomes.
Review in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing clinical trials for rare renal cell carcinoma subtypes: Consensus statements from the International Kidney Cancer Symposium North America 2025 think tank.Urologic oncology · 2026Article
- Panitumumab-Based EGFR Blockade in SMARCB1-Deficient Renal Medullary Carcinoma: Preclinical Basis and Prospective Clinical Activity.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Article
- AI-based augmentation of oncology clinical trials.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Review
- Sitravatinib in combination with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a phase 1 trial.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Centralized daily drug management in clinical trial institutions and specific implementation plans.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2025Review
- ROMI: a randomized two-stage basket trial design to optimize doses for multiple indications.Biometrics · 2024Article
- Current issues in dose-finding designs: A response to the US Food and Drug Adminstration's Oncology Center of Excellence Project Optimus.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2024Article
- A phase I trial of autologous RAK cell immunotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2024Article
- Great Wall: A Generalized Dose Optimization Design for Drug Combination Trials Maximizing Survival Benefit.Pharmaceutical statisticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conventional designs for choosing a dose for a new therapy may select doses that are unsafe or ineffective and fail to optimize progression-free survival time, overall survival time, or response/remission duration. We explain and illustrate limitations of conventional dose-finding designs and make four recommendations to address these problems. When feasible, a dose-finding design should account for long-term outcomes, include screening rules that drop unsafe or ineffective doses, enroll an adequate sample size, and randomize patients among doses. As illustrations, we review three designs that include one or more of these features. The first illustration is a trial that randomized patients among two cell therapy doses and standard of care in a setting where it was assumed on biological grounds that dose toxicity and dose-response curves did not necessarily increase with cell dose. The second design generalizes phase I-II by first identifying a set of candidate doses, rather than one dose, randomizing additional patients among the candidates, and selecting an optimal dose to maximize progression-free survival over a longer follow-up period. The third design combines a phase I-II trial and a group sequential randomized phase III trial by using survival time data available after the first stage of phase III to reoptimize the dose selected in phase I-II. By incorporating one or more of the recommended features, these designs improve the likelihood that a selected dose or schedule will be optimal, and thus will benefit future patients and obtain regulatory approval.
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.