ArticleBiometrics2025
Precision generalized phase I-II designs.
Article in Biometrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A new family of precision Bayesian dose optimization designs, PGen I-II, based on early efficacy, early toxicity, and long-term time to treatment failure is proposed. A PGen I-II design refines a Gen I-II design by accounting for patient heterogeneity characterized by subgroups that may be defined by prognostic levels, disease subtypes, or biomarker categories. The design makes subgroup-specific decisions, which may be to drop an unacceptably toxic or inefficacious dose, randomize patients among acceptable doses, or identify a best dose in terms of treatment success defined in terms of time to failure over long-term follow-up. A piecewise exponential distribution for failure time is assumed, including subgroup-specific effects of dose, response, and toxicity. Latent variables are used to adaptively cluster subgroups found to have similar dose-outcome distributions, with the model simplified to borrow strength between subgroups in the same cluster. Guidelines and user-friendly computer software for implementing the design are provided. A simulation study is reported that shows the PGen I-II design is superior to similarly structured designs that either assume patient homogeneity or conduct separate trials within subgroups.
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.