๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

An evaluation of phase I cancer clinical trial designs

โœ Scribed by Chul Ahn


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1998
Tongue
English
Weight
88 KB
Volume
17
Category
Article
ISSN
0277-6715

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis


Phase I clinical trials are designed to identify an appropriate dose for experimentation in phase II and III studies. I present the results from a simulation study to evaluate the performance of nine phase I designs involving the standard design, the two-stage modified Storer's design, the two-stage Korn's design, the one-stage modified continual reassessment method (CRM) designs, and the two-stage modified CRM designs. I compare the performance of the above phase I designs in terms of the following criteria: (i) the proportion of the recommended maximum tolerated dose (MTD) at each dose level; (ii) the proportion of patients treated at each dose level; (iii) the average number of patients to complete the trial; (iv) the probability of toxicity observed; and (v) the average number of cohorts to complete the trial. In general, the one-stage modified CRM II and CRM III designs perform well compared with the other designs considered in this study. The one-stage modified CRM II and III designs require much fewer numbers of cohorts than do the two-stage modified CRM II and III designs. The one-stage modified CRM II and III designs avoid the criticisms of the original CRM by reducing the average number of cohorts and toxicity incidences, while estimating the MTD more accurately than does the standard design.


๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Another look at two phase I clinical tri
โœ John O'Quigley ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1999 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 76 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

This note is a response to a recent paper by Korn et al. in which two phase I trial designs were compared, the designs in question being the standard design and the CRM design. The authors concluded that: (i) CRM designs will take longer to complete than standard designs; and (ii) CRM designs are le

Optimal three-stage designs for phase II
โœ T. Timothy Chen ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1997 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 136 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

The objective of a phase II cancer clinical trial is to screen a treatment that can produce a similar or better response rate compared to the current treatment results. This screening is usually carried out in two stages as proposed by Simon. For ineffective treatment, the trial should terminate at

Evaluation of phase I/II clinical trials
โœ Tjoa, B.A.; Simmons, S.J.; Bowes, V.A.; Ragde, H.; Rogers, M.; Elgamal, A.; Kenn ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1998 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 196 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

## Background: A phase i trial involving patients with advanced prostate cancer was conducted to assess the safe administration of dendritic cells (dc) and hla-a0201-specific prostate-specific membrane antigen (psma) peptides (psm-p1 or -p2). thirty-three of the phase i participants were subsequent

Bayesian interim analysis of phase II ca
โœ Daniel F. Heitjan ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1997 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 111 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

Many popular sequential phase II clinical trial designs optimize some criterion subject to constraints on the error probabilities at null and alternative values of the response rate. Such designs may forfeit optimality if one fails to conduct analyses strictly according to plan. Moreover, a decision

A phase i clinical trial of didemnin B
โœ James A. Stewart; Jane B. Low; John D. Roberts; Alton Blow ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1991 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 448 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 2 views