Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 May 30;33(12):1990-2003.
doi: 10.1002/sim.6097. Epub 2014 Jan 28.

Phase I/II adaptive design for drug combination oncology trials

Affiliations

Phase I/II adaptive design for drug combination oncology trials

Nolan A Wages et al. Stat Med. .

Abstract

Existing statistical methodology on dose finding for combination chemotherapies has focused on toxicity considerations alone in finding a maximum tolerated dose combination to recommend for further testing of efficacy in a phase II setting. Recently, there has been increasing interest in integrating phase I and phase II trials in order to facilitate drug development. In this article, we propose a new adaptive phase I/II method for dual-agent combinations that takes into account both toxicity and efficacy after each cohort inclusion. The primary objective, both within and at the conclusion of the trial, becomes finding a single dose combination with an acceptable level of toxicity that maximizes efficacious response. We assume that there exist monotone dose-toxicity and dose-efficacy relationships among doses of one agent when the dose of other agent is fixed. We perform extensive simulation studies that demonstrate the operating characteristics of our proposed approach, and we compare simulated results to existing methodology in phase I/II design for combinations of agents.

Keywords: adaptive randomization; continual reassessment method; dose finding; drug combination; phase II.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Operating characteristics of the proposed design and Yuan and Yin [19]. Each bar represents the proportion of times that each method recommended target combination(s) as the ODC at the conclusion of a simulated phase I/II trial with a maximum sample size of N = 80 patients.

References

    1. Yin G. Clinical Trial Design: Bayesian and Frequentist Adaptive Methods. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2012.
    1. Gooley TA, Martin PJ, Fisher LD, Pettinger M. Simulation as a design tool for phase I/II clinical trials: an example from bone marrow transplantation. Controlled Clinical Trials. 1994;15:450–462. - PubMed
    1. Thall PF, Russell KT. A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes on phase I/II clinical trials. Biometrics. 1998;54:251–264. - PubMed
    1. O’Quigley J, Hughes MD, Fenton T. Dose-finding designs for HIV studies. Biometrics. 2001;57:1018–1029. - PubMed
    1. Braun T. The bivariate continual reassessment method: extending the CRM to phase I trials of two competing outcomes. Controlled Clinical Trials. 2002;23:240–256. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources