ArticleJournal of biopharmaceutical statistics2026
Balancing the effective sample size in prior across different doses in the curve-free Bayesian decision-theoretic design for dose-finding trials.
Article in Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics, 2026. 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
The primary goal of dose allocation in phase I trials is to minimize patient exposure to subtherapeutic or excessively toxic doses, while accurately recommending a phase II dose that is as close as possible to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Fan introduced a curve-free Bayesian decision-theoretic design (CFBD), which leverages the assumption of a monotonic dose-toxicity relationship without directly modeling dose-toxicity curves. This approach has also been extended to drug combinations for determining the MTD. Although CFBD has demonstrated improved trial efficiency by using fewer patients while maintaining high accuracy in identifying the MTD, it may artificially inflate the effective sample sizes for the updated prior distributions, particularly at the lowest and highest dose levels. This can lead to either overshooting or undershooting the target dose. In this paper, we propose a modification to CFBD's prior distribution updates that balances effective sample sizes across different doses. Simulation results show that with the modified prior specification, CFBD achieves a more focused-dose allocation at the MTD and offers more precise-dose recommendations with fewer patients on average. It also demonstrates robustness to other well-known dose finding designs in literature.
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.