ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2025
Practical Considerations for Using the TITE-BOIN Design to Handle Late-Onset Toxicity or Fast Accrual in Phase I Trials.
Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conducting phase I trials is particularly challenging when dealing with late-onset dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) or when patient accrual is rapid relative to the DLT assessment window. In such cases, a new cohort may be ready for enrollment before the DLT assessments are complete for the current cohort, complicating dose assignment decisions. The time-to-event Bayesian optimal interval (TITE-BOIN) design was developed to address this issue by enabling real-time dose assignment for new cohorts, even when some enrolled patients' DLT data are still pending. This design has been increasingly adopted in practice. Upon reviewing trial protocols utilizing TITE-BOIN, we observed considerable variation in dosing decision criteria, ranging from no requirements to requiring that at least two thirds of enrolled patients' DLT data should be available before enrolling the next cohort. This raises a critical question: How can safety comparable with the fully staggered design be ensured? This article addresses this question by evaluating how the percentage of pending patients and the duration of their follow-up affect the operating characteristics of the TITE-BOIN design. Based on these evaluations, we generally recommend suspending accrual to allow for longer safety follow-up if fewer than 51% of patients at the current dose have their DLT data ascertained or if TITE-BOIN recommends dose escalation and the shortest follow-up time for pending patients at the current dose is less than 25% of the DLT assessment window. The rules should be further calibrated to suit specific trial considerations. Equipped with these rules, TITE-BOIN achieves similar accuracy in identifying the MTD and comparable safety to the fully staggered approach while substantially reducing trial duration and increasing patient access by enabling real-time dose decisions when some patients' DLT data are still pending.
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.