Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

29 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Bayesian optimal design for phase II screening trials.

ABSTRACT: Most phase II screening designs available in the literature consider one treatment at a time. Each study is considered in isolation. We propose a more systematic decision-making approach to the phase II screening process. The sequential design allows for more efficiency and greater learning about treatments. The approach incorporates a Bayesian hierarchical model that allows combining information across several related studies in a formal way and improves estimation in small data sets by borrowing strength from other treatments. The design incorporates a utility function that includes sampling costs and possible future payoff. Computer simulations show that this method has high probability of discarding treatments with low success rates and moving treatments with high success rates to phase III trial.

SUBMITTER: Ding M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3075947 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Publications

Bayesian optimal design for phase II screening trials.

Ding Meichun M Rosner Gary L GL Müller Peter P

Biometrics 20071220 3

Most phase II screening designs available in the literature consider one treatment at a time. Each study is considered in isolation. We propose a more systematic decision-making approach to the phase II screening process. The sequential design allows for more efficiency and greater learning about treatments. The approach incorporates a Bayesian hierarchical model that allows combining information across several related studies in a formal way and improves estimation in small data sets by borrowi ...[more]

PMID: 18162113

Similar Datasets

Time-to-Event Bayesian Optimal Interval Design to Accelerate Phase I Trials.

Project description:Late-onset toxicity is common for novel molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapy. It causes major logistic difficulty for existing adaptive phase I trial designs, which require the observance of toxicity early enough to apply dose-escalation rules for new patients. The same logistic difficulty arises when the accrual is rapid. We propose the time-to-event Bayesian optimal interval (TITE-BOIN) design to accelerate phase I trials by allowing for real-time dose assignment decisions for new patients while some enrolled patients' toxicity data are still pending. Similar to the rolling six design, the TITE-BOIN dose-escalation/deescalation rule can be tabulated before the trial begins, making it transparent and simple to implement, but is more flexible in choosing the target dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate and has higher accuracy to identify the MTD. Compared with the more complicated model-based time-to-event continuous reassessment method (TITE-CRM), the TITE-BOIN has comparable accuracy to identify the MTD but is simpler to implement with substantially better overdose control. As the TITE-CRM is more aggressive in dose escalation, it is less likely to underdose patients. When there are no pending data, the TITE-BOIN seamlessly reduces to the BOIN design. Numerical studies show that the TITE-BOIN design supports continuous accrual without sacrificing patient safety or the accuracy of identifying the MTD, and therefore has great potential to accelerate early-phase drug development. Clin Cancer Res; 24(20); 4921-30. ©2018 AACR.

| S-EPMC6191365 | biostudies-literature

Bayesian Optimal Interval Design: A Simple and Well-Performing Design for Phase I Oncology Trials.

Project description:Despite more than two decades of publications that offer more innovative model-based designs, the classical 3 + 3 design remains the most dominant phase I trial design in practice. In this article, we introduce a new trial design, the Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design. The BOIN design is easy to implement in a way similar to the 3 + 3 design, but is more flexible for choosing the target toxicity rate and cohort size and yields a substantially better performance that is comparable with that of more complex model-based designs. The BOIN design contains the 3 + 3 design and the accelerated titration design as special cases, thus linking it to established phase I approaches. A numerical study shows that the BOIN design generally outperforms the 3 + 3 design and the modified toxicity probability interval (mTPI) design. The BOIN design is more likely than the 3 + 3 design to correctly select the MTD and allocate more patients to the MTD. Compared with the mTPI design, the BOIN design has a substantially lower risk of overdosing patients and generally a higher probability of correctly selecting the MTD. User-friendly software is freely available to facilitate the application of the BOIN design. Clin Cancer Res; 22(17); 4291-301. ©2016 AACR.

| S-EPMC5047439 | biostudies-literature

TOP: Time-to-Event Bayesian Optimal Phase II Trial Design for Cancer Immunotherapy.

Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapies have revolutionized cancer treatment. Unlike chemotherapies, immune agents often take longer to show benefit, and the complex and unique mechanism of action of these agents renders the use of multiple endpoints more appropriate in some trials. These new features of immunotherapy make conventional phase II trial designs, which assume a single binary endpoint that is quickly ascertainable, inefficient and dysfunctional.MethodsWe propose a flexible and efficient time-to-event Bayesian optimal phase II (TOP) design. The TOP design is efficient in that it allows real-time "go/no-go" interim decision making in the presence of late-onset responses by using all available data and maximizes statistical power for detecting effective treatments. TOP is flexible in the number of interim looks and capable of handling simple and complicated endpoints under a unified framework. We conduct simulation studies to evaluate the operating characteristics of the TOP design.ResultsIn the considered trial settings, compared to some existing Bayesian designs, the TOP design shortens the trial duration by 4-10 months and improves the power to detect effective treatment up to 90%, with well-controlled type I errors.ConclusionsThe TOP design is transparent and easy to implement, as its decision rules can be tabulated and included in the protocol prior to the conduct of the trial. The TOP design provides a flexible, efficient, and easy-to-implement method to accelerate and improve the development of immunotherapies.

| S-EPMC8204709 | biostudies-literature

Optimal sequential enrichment designs for phase II clinical trials.

Project description:In the early phase development of molecularly targeted agents (MTAs), a commonly encountered situation is that the MTA is expected to be more effective for a certain biomarker subgroup, say marker-positive patients, but there is no adequate evidence to show that the MTA does not work for the other subgroup, that is, marker-negative patients. After establishing that marker-positive patients benefit from the treatment, it is often of great clinical interest to determine whether the treatment benefit extends to marker-negative patients. The authors propose optimal sequential enrichment (OSE) designs to address this practical issue in the context of phase II clinical trials. The OSE designs evaluate the treatment effect first in marker-positive patients and then in marker-negative patients if needed. The designs are optimal in the sense that they minimize the expected sample size or the maximum sample size under the null hypothesis that the MTA is futile. An efficient, accurate optimization algorithm is proposed to find the optimal design parameters. One important advantage of the OSE design is that the go/no-go interim decision rules are specified prior to the trial conduct, which makes the design particularly easy to use in practice. A simulation study shows that the OSE designs perform well and are ethically more desirable than the commonly used marker-stratified design. The OSE design is applied to an endometrial carcinoma trial. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

| S-EPMC5138118 | biostudies-literature

A comparative study of Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design with interval 3+3 (i3+3) design for phase I oncology dose-finding trials.

Project description:Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design is a model-assisted phase I dose-finding design to find the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The hallmark of the BOIN design is its concise decision rule - making the decision of dose escalation and de-escalation by simply comparing the observed dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate at the current dose with a pair of optimal dose escalation and de-escalation boundaries. The interval 3+3 (i3+3) design is a recently proposed algorithm-based dose-finding design based on a similar decision rule with some modifications. The similarity in the appearance of the two designs has caused confusions among practitioners. In this article, we demystify the i3+3 design by elucidating its links with the BOIN design and compare their similarities and differences, as well as pros and cons. We perform comprehensive simulation studies to compare the operating characteristics of the two designs. Our results show that, compared to the algorithm-based i3+3 design, which are characterized by ad hoc and often scientifically and logically incoherent decision rules, the mode-assisted BOIN design is not only simpler, but also statistically more rigorous with better operating characteristics, thus providing a better design choice for phase I oncology trials.

| S-EPMC8261789 | biostudies-literature

A Bayesian design for phase I cancer therapeutic vaccine trials.

Project description:Phase I clinical trials are the first step in drug development to test a new drug or drug combination on humans. Typical designs of Phase I trials use toxicity as the primary endpoint and aim to find the maximum tolerable dosage. However, these designs are poorly applicable for the development of cancer therapeutic vaccines because the expected safety concerns for these vaccines are not as much as cytotoxic agents. The primary objectives of a cancer therapeutic vaccine phase I trial thus often include determining whether the vaccine shows biologic activity and the minimum dose necessary to achieve a full immune or even clinical response. In this paper, we propose a new Bayesian phase I trial design that allows simultaneous evaluation of safety and immunogenicity outcomes. We demonstrate the proposed clinical trial design by both a numeric study and a therapeutic human papillomavirus vaccine trial.

| S-EPMC6399043 | biostudies-literature

Optimal two-stage design of single arm Phase II clinical trials based on median event time test.

Project description:The Phase II clinical trials aim to assess the therapeutic efficacy of a new drug. The therapeutic efficacy has been often quantified by response rate such as overall response rate or survival probability in the Phase II setting. However, there is a strong desire to use survival time, which is the gold standard endpoint for the confirmatory Phase III study, when investigators set the primary objective of the Phase II study and test hypotheses based on the median survivals. We propose a method for median event time test to provide the sample size calculation and decision rule of testing. The decision rule is simple and straightforward in that it compares the observed median event time to the identified threshold. Moreover, it is extended to optimal two-stage design for practice, which extends the idea of Simon's optimal two-stage design for survival endpoint. We investigate the performance of the proposed methods through simulation studies. The proposed methods are applied to redesign a trial based on median event time for trial illustration, and practical strategies are given for application of proposed methods.

| S-EPMC7870013 | biostudies-literature

A utility-based Bayesian optimal interval (U-BOIN) phase I/II design to identify the optimal biological dose for targeted and immune therapies.

Project description:In the era of targeted therapy and immunotherapy, the objective of dose finding is often to identify the optimal biological dose (OBD), rather than the maximum tolerated dose. We develop a utility-based Bayesian optimal interval (U-BOIN) phase I/II design to find the OBD. We jointly model toxicity and efficacy using a multinomial-Dirichlet model, and employ a utility function to measure dose risk-benefit trade-off. The U-BOIN design consists of two seamless stages. In stage I, the Bayesian optimal interval design is used to quickly explore the dose space and collect preliminary toxicity and efficacy data. In stage II, we continuously update the posterior estimate of the utility for each dose after each cohort, using accumulating efficacy and toxicity from both stages I and II, and then use the posterior estimate to direct the dose assignment and selection. Compared to existing phase I/II designs, one prominent advantage of the U-BOIN design is its simplicity for implementation. Once the trial is designed, it can be easily applied using predetermined decision tables, without complex model fitting and estimation. Our simulation study shows that, despite its simplicity, the U-BOIN design is robust and has high accuracy to identify the OBD. We extend the design to accommodate delayed efficacy by leveraging the short-term endpoint (eg, immune activity or other biological activity of targeted agents), and using it to predict the delayed efficacy outcome to facilitate real-time decision making. A user-friendly software to implement the U-BOIN is freely available at www.trialdesign.org.

| S-EPMC7927960 | biostudies-literature

A Bayesian Phase I/II Trial Design for Immunotherapy.

Project description:Immunotherapy is an innovative treatment approach that stimulates a patient's immune system to fight cancer. It demonstrates characteristics distinct from conventional chemotherapy and stands to revolutionize cancer treatment. We propose a Bayesian phase I/II dosefinding design that incorporates the unique features of immunotherapy by simultaneously considering three outcomes: immune response, toxicity and efficacy. The objective is to identify the biologically optimal dose, defined as the dose with the highest desirability in the risk-benefit tradeoff. An Emax model is utilized to describe the marginal distribution of the immune response. Conditional on the immune response, we jointly model toxicity and efficacy using a latent variable approach. Using the accumulating data, we adaptively randomize patients to experimental doses based on the continuously updated model estimates. A simulation study shows that our proposed design has good operating characteristics in terms of selecting the target dose and allocating patients to the target dose.

| S-EPMC6860919 | biostudies-literature

A Bayesian seamless phase I-II trial design with two stages for cancer clinical trials with drug combinations.

Project description:The use of drug combinations in clinical trials is increasingly common during the last years since a more favorable therapeutic response may be obtained by combining drugs. In phase I clinical trials, most of the existing methodology recommends a one unique dose combination as "optimal," which may result in a subsequent failed phase II clinical trial since other dose combinations may present higher treatment efficacy for the same level of toxicity. We are particularly interested in the setting where it is necessary to wait a few cycles of therapy to observe an efficacy outcome and the phase I and II population of patients are different with respect to treatment efficacy. Under these circumstances, it is common practice to implement two-stage designs where a set of maximum tolerated dose combinations is selected in a first stage, and then studied in a second stage for treatment efficacy. In this article we present a new two-stage design for early phase clinical trials with drug combinations. In the first stage, binary toxicity data is used to guide the dose escalation and set the maximum tolerated dose combinations. In the second stage, we take the set of maximum tolerated dose combinations recommended from the first stage, which remains fixed along the entire second stage, and through adaptive randomization, we allocate subsequent cohorts of patients in dose combinations that are likely to have high posterior median time to progression. The methodology is assessed with extensive simulations and exemplified with a real trial.

| S-EPMC7483235 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data