Two-stage subgroup-specific time-to-event (2S-Sub-TITE): An adaptive two-stage time-to-toxicity design for subgroup-specific dose finding in phase I oncology trials
- PMID: 35560864
- DOI: 10.1002/pst.2231
Two-stage subgroup-specific time-to-event (2S-Sub-TITE): An adaptive two-stage time-to-toxicity design for subgroup-specific dose finding in phase I oncology trials
Abstract
For phase I trials, the subgroup-specific time-to-event (Sub-TITE) design identifies the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) separately in 2+ heterogeneous patient subgroups. Sub-TITE allows borrowing strength and dynamic clustering across subgroups from the trial's start, but delaying the initiation of borrowing and clustering may improve trial accuracy. We propose the 2-stage Sub-TITE (2S-Sub-TITE) design in which the trial starts by estimating separate models per subgroup, and then initiates the Sub-TITE design at some pre-specified point of patient accrual. We evaluate the operating characteristics of the 2S-Sub-TITE design using simulations. Nine configurations of the 2S-Sub-TITE design (varying in timing of initiation of borrowing/clustering and prior probability of subgroup heterogeneity, p_hetero) and three control methods were compared across 1000 randomly-generated true toxicity probability scenarios. Effects of priors, sample size, escalation rules, target toxicity probability, accrual rate, and number of subgroups were evaluated. Metrics included: proportion of correct selection (PCS) of the true MTD, and average number of toxicities incurred. Among the 5 2S-Sub-TITE configurations (out of 9 total) with the highest PCS (45%) when the subgroup heterogeneity assumption is correct (all of which out-perform the control methods by 2%-6%), the configuration which enables borrowing and clustering allowance with p_hetero = 0.7 starting at 75% patient accrual best minimizes toxicities as well as losses in accuracy if the heterogeneity assumption is incorrect. For trials with high confidence in subgroup heterogeneity, the 2S-Sub-TITE configuration enabling borrowing/clustering with p_hetero = 0.7 starting at 75% patient accrual exhibits superior dose-finding accuracy compared to existing methods.
Keywords: Bayesian adaptive design; continual reassessment method; phase I clinical trials; subgroup-specific dose finding.
© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Adaptive Bayesian information borrowing methods for finding and optimizing subgroup-specific doses.Clin Trials. 2024 Jun;21(3):308-321. doi: 10.1177/17407745231212193. Epub 2024 Jan 19. Clin Trials. 2024. PMID: 38243401 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Subgroup-specific dose finding in phase I clinical trials based on time to toxicity allowing adaptive subgroup combination.Pharm Stat. 2018 Nov;17(6):734-749. doi: 10.1002/pst.1891. Epub 2018 Aug 15. Pharm Stat. 2018. PMID: 30112806 Free PMC article.
-
A new pragmatic design for dose escalation in phase 1 clinical trials using an adaptive continual reassessment method.BMC Cancer. 2019 Jun 26;19(1):632. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5801-3. BMC Cancer. 2019. PMID: 31242873 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Escalation with overdose control using all toxicities and time to event toxicity data in cancer Phase I clinical trials.Contemp Clin Trials. 2014 Mar;37(2):322-32. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2014.02.004. Epub 2014 Feb 12. Contemp Clin Trials. 2014. PMID: 24530487 Free PMC article.
-
Fractional design: An alternative paradigm for late-onset toxicities in oncology dose-finding studies.Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2020 Aug 18;19:100650. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100650. eCollection 2020 Sep. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2020. PMID: 32875142 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Adaptive Bayesian information borrowing methods for finding and optimizing subgroup-specific doses.Clin Trials. 2024 Jun;21(3):308-321. doi: 10.1177/17407745231212193. Epub 2024 Jan 19. Clin Trials. 2024. PMID: 38243401 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Precision generalized phase I-II designs.Biometrics. 2025 Jul 3;81(3):ujaf043. doi: 10.1093/biomtc/ujaf043. Biometrics. 2025. PMID: 40705487 Free PMC article.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Nader JH, Neel DV, Shulman DS, Ma C, Bourgeois F, DuBois SG. Landscape of phase 1 clinical trials for minors with cancer in the United States. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2020;67(11):e28694. PMID: 32886429; PMCID: PMC7896417. doi:10.1002/pbc.28694
-
- Storer BE. Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials. Biometrics. 1989;45:925-937.
-
- Skolnik JM, Barrett JS, Jayaraman B, Patel D, Adamson PC. Shortening the timeline of pediatric phase I trials: the rolling six design. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:190-195. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.12.7712
-
- Simon R, Freidlin B, Rubinstein L, et al. Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;89:1138-1147. doi:10.1093/jnci/89.15.1138
-
- O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics. 1990;46:33-48.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical