A decision-theoretic phase I-II design for ordinal outcomes in two cycles.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lee J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4834949 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:A Bayesian model and design are described for a phase I-II trial to jointly optimise the doses of a targeted agent and a chemotherapy agent for solid tumors. A challenge in designing the trial was that both the efficacy and toxicity outcomes were defined as four-level ordinal variables. To reflect possibly complex joint effects of the two doses on each of the two outcomes, for each marginal distribution a generalised continuation ratio model was assumed, with each agent's dose parametrically standardised in the linear term. A copula was assumed to obtain a bivariate distribution. Elicited outcome probabilities were used to construct a prior, with variances calibrated to obtain small prior effective sample size. Elicited numerical utilities of the 16 elementary outcomes were used to compute posterior mean utilities as criteria for selecting dose pairs, with adaptive randomisation to reduce the risk of getting stuck at a suboptimal pair. A simulation study showed that parametric dose standardisation with additive dose effects provides a robust, reliable model for dose pair optimisation in this setting, and it compares favourably with designs based on alternative models that include dose-dose interaction terms. The proposed model and method are applicable generally to other clinical trial settings with similar dose and outcome structures.
| S-EPMC5328131 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We propose a class of phase II clinical trial designs with sequential stopping and adaptive treatment allocation to evaluate treatment efficacy. Our work is based on two-arm (control and experimental treatment) designs with binary endpoints. Our overall goal is to construct more efficient and ethical randomized phase II trials by reducing the average sample sizes and increasing the percentage of patients assigned to the better treatment arms of the trials. The designs combine the Bayesian decision-theoretic sequential approach with adaptive randomization procedures in order to achieve simultaneous goals of improved efficiency and ethics. The design parameters represent the costs of different decisions, for example, the decisions for stopping or continuing the trials. The parameters enable us to incorporate the actual costs of the decisions in practice. The proposed designs allow the clinical trials to stop early for either efficacy or futility. Furthermore, the designs assign more patients to better treatment arms by applying adaptive randomization procedures. We develop an algorithm based on the constrained backward induction and forward simulation to implement the designs. The algorithm overcomes the computational difficulty of the backward induction method, thereby making our approach practicable. The designs result in trials with desirable operating characteristics under the simulated settings. Moreover, the designs are robust with respect to the response rate of the control group.
| S-EPMC3873748 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Randomised controlled trials are considered the gold standard in trial design. However, phase II oncology trials with a binary outcome are often single-arm. Although a number of reasons exist for choosing a single-arm trial, the primary reason is that single-arm designs require fewer participants than their randomised equivalents. Therefore, the development of novel methodology that makes randomised designs more efficient is of value to the trials community. This article introduces a randomised two-arm binary outcome trial design that includes stochastic curtailment (SC), allowing for the possibility of stopping a trial before the final conclusions are known with certainty. In addition to SC, the proposed design involves the use of a randomised block design, which allows investigators to control the number of interim analyses. This approach is compared with existing designs that also use early stopping, through the use of a loss function comprised of a weighted sum of design characteristics. Comparisons are also made using an example from a real trial. The comparisons show that for many possible loss functions, the proposed design is superior to existing designs. Further, the proposed design may be more practical, by allowing a flexible number of interim analyses. One existing design produces superior design realisations when the anticipated response rate is low. However, when using this design, the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis is sensitive to misspecification of the null response rate. Therefore, when considering randomised designs in phase II, we recommend the proposed approach be preferred over other sequential designs.
| S-EPMC7612167 | biostudies-literature
Project description:For many years phase I and phase II clinical trials have been conducted separately, but there has been a recent shift to combine these phases. Although a variety of phase I-II model-based designs for cytotoxic agents have been proposed in the literature, methods for molecularly targeted agents (TAs) are just starting to develop. The main challenge of the TA setting is the unknown dose-efficacy relationship that can have either an increasing, plateau or umbrella shape. To capture these, approaches with more parameters are needed or, alternatively, more orderings are required to account for the uncertainty in the dose-efficacy relationship. As a result, designs for more complex clinical trials, e.g. trials looking at schedules of a combination treatment involving TAs, have not been extensively studied yet. We propose a novel regimen finding design which is based on a derived efficacy-toxicity trade-off function. Because of its special properties, an accurate regimen selection can be achieved without any parametric or monotonicity assumptions. We illustrate how this design can be applied in the context of a complex combination-schedule clinical trial. We discuss practical and ethical issues such as coherence, delayed and missing efficacy responses, safety and futility constraints.
| S-EPMC6472641 | biostudies-other
Project description:The success of drug development of targeted therapy often hinges on an appropriate selection of the sensitive patient population, mostly based on patients' biomarker levels. At the planning stage of a phase II study, although a potential biomarker may have been identified, a threshold value for defining sensitive patient population is often unavailable for adopting many existing biomarker-guided designs. To address this issue, we propose a two-stage design that allows for simultaneous biomarker threshold selection and efficacy evaluation while accommodating situations where the drug is efficacious in the entire patient population. The design uses a Bayesian decision-theoretic approach and incorporates the benefit and cost considerations of the study into a utility function. The operating characteristics of the proposed design under different scenarios are investigated via simulations. We also provide a discussion on the choice of the benefit and cost parameters in practice.
| S-EPMC10187767 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The selection and assessment process of appropriate robots became a more complex and complicated task due to various available alternatives and conflicting attributes which must take into consideration. Also, uncertainty which exists usually in the selection process is an unavoidable component that needs to be thoughtfully measured and traditional multi-attribute decision-making approaches failed to deal precisely with it. Since almost all decisions originate from subjective ordinal preferences, handling uncertainty using linguistic variables is also not enough. Thus, the objective of the current study is to present a new extended ordinal priority approach in the neutrosophic environment for the first time to select an appropriate robot. Since neutrosophic is one of the most effective and accommodating tools for handling uncertainty, thus, this method goes to transform linguistic information into triangular neutrosophic numbers using a new presented scale. This scale was used to determine the importance degree of attributes and alternatives regarding experts' opinions. Also, the score function of the triangular neutrosophic number is used for prioritizing attributes and alternatives. The experts in our proposed method have the same degree of importance, since each expert is a person with special skills and knowledge representing mastery of a particular subject. To measure the applicability and efficiency of the proposed approach, an experimental case study has been established for the robot selection problem of a new pharmaceutical city in Egypt for the first time. The source of data in this case study is experts, interviews, and questionnaires. Also, sensitivity and comparative analysis are further made for verifying the power of the proposed approach. The outcome of this study shows that the suggested approach for robot selection is quite helpful and has a great performance under uncertainty over classical and fuzzy ordinal priority approaches. Also, the suggested approach is less consumption of time and simpler than the fuzzy ordinal priority approach. Therefore, we recommend firms and governments to apply it for increasing product quality, hence the profitability of manufacturing industries and decrease needless costs.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40747-022-00721-w.
| S-EPMC9051802 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A design is proposed for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups. The design accounts for patient heterogeneity by allowing possibly different comparative conclusions within subgroups. The comparative testing criterion is based on utilities for the levels of the ordinal outcome and a Bayesian probability model. Designs based on two alternative models that include treatment-subgroup interactions are considered, the proportional odds model and a non-proportional odds model with a hierarchical prior that shrinks toward the proportional odds model. A third design that assumes homogeneity and ignores possible treatment-subgroup interactions also is considered. The three approaches are applied to construct group sequential designs for a trial of nutritional prehabilitation versus standard of care for esophageal cancer patients undergoing chemoradiation and surgery, including both untreated patients and salvage patients whose disease has recurred following previous therapy. A simulation study is presented that compares the three designs, including evaluation of within-subgroup type I and II error probabilities under a variety of scenarios including different combinations of treatment-subgroup interactions.
| S-EPMC6054910 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Bayesian clinical trials allow taking advantage of relevant external information through the elicitation of prior distributions, which influence Bayesian posterior parameter estimates and test decisions. However, incorporation of historical information can have harmful consequences on the trial's frequentist (conditional) operating characteristics in case of inconsistency between prior information and the newly collected data. A compromise between meaningful incorporation of historical information and strict control of frequentist error rates is therefore often sought. Our aim is thus to review and investigate the rationale and consequences of different approaches to relaxing strict frequentist control of error rates from a Bayesian decision-theoretic viewpoint. In particular, we define an integrated risk which incorporates losses arising from testing, estimation, and sampling. A weighted combination of the integrated risk addends arising from testing and estimation allows moving smoothly between these two targets. Furthermore, we explore different possible elicitations of the test error costs, leading to test decisions based either on posterior probabilities, or solely on Bayes factors. Sensitivity analyses are performed following the convention which makes a distinction between the prior of the data-generating process, and the analysis prior adopted to fit the data. Simulation in the case of normal and binomial outcomes and an application to a one-arm proof-of-concept trial, exemplify how such analysis can be conducted to explore sensitivity of the integrated risk, the operating characteristics, and the optimal sample size, to prior-data conflict. Robust analysis prior specifications, which gradually discount potentially conflicting prior information, are also included for comparison. Guidance with respect to cost elicitation, particularly in the context of a Phase II proof-of-concept trial, is provided.
| S-EPMC9118338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We discuss a decision-theoretic approach to building a panel-based, preemptive genotyping program. The method is based on findings that a large percentage of patients are prescribed medications that are known to have pharmacogenetic associations, and over time, a substantial proportion are prescribed additional such medication. Preemptive genotyping facilitates genotype-guided therapy at the time medications are prescribed; panel-based testing allows providers to reuse previously collected genetic data when a new indication arises. Because it is cost-prohibitive to conduct panel-based genotyping on all patients, we describe a three-step approach to identify patients with the highest anticipated benefit. First, we construct prediction models to estimate the risk of being prescribed one of the target medications using readily available clinical data. Second, we use literature-based estimates of adverse event rates, variant allele frequencies, secular death rates, and costs to construct a discrete event simulation that estimates the expected benefit of having an individual's genetic data in the electronic health record after an indication has occurred. Finally, we combine medication prescription risk with expected benefit of genotyping once a medication is indicated to calculate the expected benefit of preemptive genotyping. For each patient-clinic visit, we calculate this expected benefit across a range of medications and select patients with the highest expected benefit overall. We build a proof of concept implementation using a cohort of patients from a single academic medical center observed from July 2010 through December 2012. We then apply the results of our modeling strategy to show the extent to which we can improve clinical and economic outcomes in a cohort observed from January 2013 through December 2015.
| S-EPMC6699004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:An outcome-adaptive Bayesian design is proposed for choosing the optimal dose pair of a chemotherapeutic agent and a biological agent used in combination in a phase I/II clinical trial. Patient outcome is characterized as a vector of two ordinal variables accounting for toxicity and treatment efficacy. A generalization of the Aranda-Ordaz model (1981, Biometrika 68, 357-363) is used for the marginal outcome probabilities as functions of a dose pair, and a Gaussian copula is assumed to obtain joint distributions. Numerical utilities of all elementary patient outcomes, allowing the possibility that efficacy is inevaluable due to severe toxicity, are obtained using an elicitation method aimed to establish consensus among the physicians planning the trial. For each successive patient cohort, a dose pair is chosen to maximize the posterior mean utility. The method is illustrated by a trial in bladder cancer, including simulation studies of the method's sensitivity to prior parameters, the numerical utilities, correlation between the outcomes, sample size, cohort size, and starting dose pair.
| S-EPMC2893272 | biostudies-literature