Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41572569›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2026

A Biomarker-Based Dose-Schedule Optimization Design for Immunotherapy Trials.

Yingjie Qiu, Yan Han, Beibei Guo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

Yingjie QiuPeter O'Donnell Jr. School of Public Health, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-9429-2131
Yan HanDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Beibei GuoDepartment of Experimental Statistics, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9921-5535

Funding

UT Southwestern Medical Center Simmons Comprehensive Cancer CenterP30CA142543 · NCI · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI Sandi Leigh Pruitt · 2010 to 2026
$53.7M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute UM1TR004402NCI NIH HHS P30CA142543
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In immunotherapy, both the dose and the schedule of drug administration can significantly influence therapeutic effects by modulating immune system activation. Incorporating immune response measures into clinical trial designs offers an opportunity to enhance decision-making by leveraging their close association with therapeutic efficacy and toxicity. Motivated by settings where biomarker data indicate improved efficacy in biomarker-positive patients, we propose a dose-schedule optimization strategy tailored to each biomarker-defined subgroup, based on elicited utility functions that capture risk-benefit tradeoffs. We introduce a joint modeling framework that simultaneously evaluates immune response, toxicity, and efficacy, enabling information sharing across outcome types and patient subgroups. Our approach utilizes parsimonious yet flexible models designed specifically to address challenges due to small sample sizes commonly encountered in early-phase trials. Simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed design achieves desirable operating characteristics and effectively informs dose-schedule optimization.

Indexed as

BiomarkersClinical Trials as TopicImmunotherapyBayes TheoremComputer SimulationDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleHumansModels, StatisticalResearch DesignBiomarkersBayesian adaptive designbiomarkerimmunotherapyoptimal treatment regimephase I/II trialrisk‐benefit tradeoffsubgroups

Identifiers

PMID41572569
PMCPMC12828111

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.