ArticlePharmaceutical statistics
A Dose-Finding Design for Drug Combinations Using a Bayesian 4 Parameter Logistic Model With Penalised D-Optimality.
Article in Pharmaceutical statistics. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug combinations, where two drugs are co-administered, are being explored widely within Phase I trials in oncology. These trials aim to identify the maximum tolerated dose combination (MTDC) by adapting the dose of both treatments based on current trial data. Various methods have been proposed to inform how escalation decisions are made within a trial. We propose a model-based design which aims to adapt the dose combination that participants receive to a level that maximises the information gained from each move across the toxicity surface, subject to admissibility and escalation constraints (penalised D-Optimality strategy). We simulated multiple different scenarios, and the penalised D-Optimality strategy is shown to have similar operating characteristics to the Interval approach, which is widely used within Phase I oncology trials. Furthermore, the penalised D-Optimality strategy shows further exploration across the toxicity surface, providing the potential to identify multiple MTDCs, further characterise the risk-benefit profile and provide flexibility for dose selection in future trials. We also show how priors of the two drugs can be specified to show a favoured escalation route if pre-clinical data suggests this.
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.