ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Bayesian Ordered Lattice Design for Phase I Clinical Trials.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We develop a new framework specifically for early Phase I clinical trials called Bayesian Ordered Lattice Design (BOLD). This study is motivated by two key factors. First, Phase I clinical trials typically involve relatively small sample sizes, which can make the use of prior information on dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rates highly significant. To address this challenge, the proposed Bayesian methodology incorporates prior information and posterior updating to guide dose selection, toxicity monitoring, early stopping, and identification of the maximum tolerable dose (MTD). Second, a natural ordering among toxicity probabilities across different dose levels can be utilized, with the idea being that analysis of dose-level posterior probabilities can and should acquire insights from data obtained at other dose levels, by leveraging their order relationship. Our proposed approach employs straightforward dose-level Bayesian specifications and relies on intuitive and clinically interpretable DLT rate posterior probabilities for decision-making. Importantly, we show that it can often outperform popular methods in terms of accuracy in determining the MTD. This Bayesian approach is also computationally simple and avoids simulation.
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.