Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42059368›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2026

Defining Utility as a Measure of Preference Under Uncertainty in Phase I-II Oncology Dose Finding Trials.

Andrew Hall, Duncan Wilson, Stuart Barber, Sarah R Brown

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Andrew HallInstitute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7009-571X
Duncan WilsonInstitute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7949-8718
Stuart BarberSchool of Mathematics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7611-7219
Sarah R BrownInstitute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Funding

Myeloma UK
6 · The paper itself

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

Antineoplastic AgentsClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicNeoplasmsBayes TheoremComputer SimulationDecision TheoryDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansMaximum Tolerated DoseUncertaintyAntineoplastic Agentsdose findingphase I–II decision theoreticreference dependenceutility

Identifiers

PMID42059368
PMCPMC13130384

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.