ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Defining Utility as a Measure of Preference Under Uncertainty in Phase I-II Oncology Dose Finding 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The main objective of dose finding trials is to find an optimal dose amongst a candidate set for further research. The trial design in oncology proceeds in stages with a decision as to how to treat the next group of patients made at every stage until a final sample size is reached or the trial stopped early. This work applies a Bayesian decision-theoretic approach to the problem, proposing a new utility function based on both efficacy and toxicity and grounded in von Neumann-Morgenstern (VNM) utility theory. Our proposed framework seeks to better capture real clinical judgments by allowing attitudes to risk to vary when the judgments are of gains or losses, which are defined with respect to an intermediate outcome known as a reference point. We call this method Reference Dependent Decision Theoretic dose finding (R2DT). A simulation study demonstrates that the framework can perform well and produce good operating characteristics. The simulation results demonstrate that R2DT is better at detecting the optimal dose in scenarios where candidate doses are around minimum acceptable efficacy and maximum acceptable toxicity thresholds. The proposed framework shows that a flexible utility function, which better captures clinician beliefs, can lead to trials with good operating characteristics, including a high probability of finding the optimal dose. Our work demonstrates proof-of-concept for this framework, which should be evaluated in a broader range of settings.
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.