• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Proportional odds model for dose-finding clinical trial designs with ordinal toxicity grading.具有有序毒性分级的剂量发现临床试验设计的比例优势模型。
Stat Med. 2011 Jul 30;30(17):2070-80. doi: 10.1002/sim.4069. Epub 2011 Feb 23.
2
Dose-finding clinical trial design for ordinal toxicity grades using the continuation ratio model: an extension of the continual reassessment method.序贯毒性分级剂量发现临床试验设计:连续评估法的扩展。
Clin Trials. 2012 Jun;9(3):303-13. doi: 10.1177/1740774512443593. Epub 2012 Apr 30.
3
Bayesian interval-based oncology dose-finding design with repeated quasi-continuous toxicity model.基于贝叶斯区间的肿瘤剂量递增设计,采用重复准连续毒性模型。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2021 Mar;102:106265. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106265. Epub 2021 Jan 5.
4
Assessment of various continual reassessment method models for dose-escalation phase 1 oncology clinical trials: using real clinical data and simulation studies.评估肿瘤 1 期临床试验剂量递增阶段的各种连续再评估方法模型:使用真实临床数据和模拟研究。
BMC Cancer. 2021 Jan 5;21(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07703-6.
5
The 3 + 3 design in dose-finding studies with small sample sizes: Pitfalls and possible remedies.在样本量较小的剂量发现研究中使用 3+3 设计:陷阱及可能的补救措施。
Clin Trials. 2024 Jun;21(3):350-357. doi: 10.1177/17407745241240401. Epub 2024 Apr 15.
6
Practical modifications to the time-to-event continual reassessment method for phase I cancer trials with fast patient accrual and late-onset toxicities.适用于快速入组和迟发性毒性的 I 期癌症试验的时间事件连续再评估方法的实用改进。
Stat Med. 2011 Jul 30;30(17):2130-43. doi: 10.1002/sim.4255. Epub 2011 May 17.
7
A comparison of phase I dose-finding designs in clinical trials with monotonicity assumption violation.违反单调假设的临床试验中 I 期剂量发现设计的比较。
Clin Trials. 2020 Oct;17(5):522-534. doi: 10.1177/1740774520932130. Epub 2020 Jul 7.
8
How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method.如何使用连续评估法设计剂量探索研究。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Jan 18;19(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0638-z.
9
Rolling continual reassessment method with overdose control: An efficient and safe dose escalation design.滚动连续评估法加过量控制:一种高效安全的剂量递增设计。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2021 Aug;107:106436. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106436. Epub 2021 May 14.
10
Targeted-Agent Continual Reassessment Method: A Novel Bayesian Enrichment Design for Phase I Trials of Molecularly Targeted Therapies.靶向药物连续重新评估法:一种用于分子靶向治疗Ⅰ期试验的新型贝叶斯富集设计
JCO Precis Oncol. 2024 Dec;8:e2400360. doi: 10.1200/PO.24.00360. Epub 2024 Dec 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Dose Finding in Oncology Trials Guided by Ordinal Toxicity Grades Using Continuous Dose Levels.使用连续剂量水平,依据序贯毒性分级指导肿瘤学试验中的剂量探索。
Entropy (Basel). 2024 Aug 14;26(8):687. doi: 10.3390/e26080687.
2
Modeling synergism in early phase cancer trials with drug combination with continuous dose levels: is there an added value?在早期癌症试验中对具有连续剂量水平的联合用药协同作用进行建模:是否存在附加价值?
Braz J Biom. 2022 Dec;40(4):453-468. doi: 10.28951/bjb.v40i4.627. Epub 2022 Dec 30.
3
Statistical and practical considerations in planning and conduct of dose-optimization trials.规划和实施剂量优化试验的统计学和实际考虑因素。
Clin Trials. 2024 Jun;21(3):273-286. doi: 10.1177/17407745231207085. Epub 2024 Jan 19.
4
On the properties of the toxicity index and its statistical efficiency.关于毒性指数的性质及其统计效率
Stat Med. 2021 Mar 15;40(6):1535-1552. doi: 10.1002/sim.8858. Epub 2020 Dec 20.
5
A Bayesian Adaptive Design in Cancer Phase I Trials Using Dose Combinations with Ordinal Toxicity Grades.一种在癌症I期试验中使用具有序贯毒性等级的剂量组合的贝叶斯自适应设计。
Stats (Basel). 2020 Sep;3(3):221-238. doi: 10.3390/stats3030017. Epub 2020 Jul 17.
6
GUIP1: a R package for dose escalation strategies in phase I cancer clinical trials.GUIP1:一个用于 I 期癌症临床试验剂量递增策略的 R 包。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Jun 24;20(1):134. doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01149-3.
7
Proportional odds assumption for modeling longitudinal ordinal multiple toxicity outcomes in dose finding studies of targeted agents: A pooled analysis of 54 studies.靶向药物剂量探索研究中纵向有序多重毒性结局建模的比例优势假设:54项研究的汇总分析
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2020 Jan 25;17:100529. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100529. eCollection 2020 Mar.
8
Modeling adverse event counts in phase I clinical trials of a cytotoxic agent.建模细胞毒剂 I 期临床试验中不良事件计数。
Clin Trials. 2018 Aug;15(4):386-397. doi: 10.1177/1740774518772309. Epub 2018 May 19.
9
Dose-finding designs for cumulative toxicities using multiple constraints.采用多重约束的累积毒性剂量发现设计。
Biostatistics. 2019 Jan 1;20(1):17-29. doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxx059.
10
Phase I Designs that Allow for Uncertainty in the Attribution of Adverse Events.允许不良事件归因存在不确定性的I期设计。
J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2017 Nov;66(5):1015-1030. doi: 10.1111/rssc.12195. Epub 2016 Nov 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Optimal phase I dose-escalation trial designs in oncology--a simulation study.肿瘤学中最优的I期剂量递增试验设计——一项模拟研究。
Stat Med. 2008 Nov 20;27(26):5329-44. doi: 10.1002/sim.3037.
2
The continual reassessment method for multiple toxicity grades: a Bayesian quasi-likelihood approach.多毒性等级的连续重新评估方法:一种贝叶斯拟似然方法。
Biometrics. 2007 Mar;63(1):173-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2006.00666.x.
3
The continual reassessment method for dose-finding studies: a tutorial.剂量探索研究的连续重新评估方法:教程
Clin Trials. 2006;3(1):57-71. doi: 10.1191/1740774506cn134oa.
4
Quantile estimation following non-parametric phase I clinical trials with ordinal response.具有有序反应的非参数I期临床试验后的分位数估计。
Stat Med. 2004 Aug 30;23(16):2483-95. doi: 10.1002/sim.1834.
5
Practical model-based dose-finding in phase I clinical trials: methods based on toxicity.I期临床试验中基于模型的实用剂量探索:基于毒性的方法
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2003 May-Jun;13(3):251-61. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1438.2003.13202.x.
6
A simple technique to evaluate model sensitivity in the continual reassessment method.一种在连续重新评估法中评估模型敏感性的简单技术。
Biometrics. 2002 Sep;58(3):671-4. doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2002.00671.x.
7
Competing designs for phase I clinical trials: a review.I期临床试验的竞争设计:综述
Stat Med. 2002 Sep 30;21(18):2757-70. doi: 10.1002/sim.1229.
8
The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies.连续重新评估法:剂量范围研究的贝叶斯停止规则比较
Stat Med. 2001 Oct 15;20(19):2827-43. doi: 10.1002/sim.920.
9
The continual reassessment method and its applications: a Bayesian methodology for phase I cancer clinical trials.连续重新评估法及其应用:一种用于I期癌症临床试验的贝叶斯方法
Stat Med. 2001;20(17-18):2661-81. doi: 10.1002/sim.735.
10
Adaptive design improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies.I期研究连续重新评估法中的适应性设计改进
Stat Med. 1999 Jun 15;18(11):1307-21. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19990615)18:11<1307::aid-sim128>3.0.co;2-x.

具有有序毒性分级的剂量发现临床试验设计的比例优势模型。

Proportional odds model for dose-finding clinical trial designs with ordinal toxicity grading.

机构信息

Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA.

出版信息

Stat Med. 2011 Jul 30;30(17):2070-80. doi: 10.1002/sim.4069. Epub 2011 Feb 23.

DOI:10.1002/sim.4069
PMID:21344472
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3117067/
Abstract

Currently many dose-finding clinical trial designs, including the continual reassessment method (CRM) and the standard ' 3 + 3' design, dichotomize toxicity outcomes based on the pre-specified dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) criteria. This loss of information is particularly inefficient due to the small sample sizes in phase I trials. Common Toxicity Criteria (CTCAEv3.0) classify adverse events into grades 1-5, which range from 1 as a mild adverse event to 5 as death related to an adverse event. In this paper, we extend the CRM to include ordinal toxicity outcomes as specified by CTCAEv3.0 using the proportional odds model (POM) and compare results with the dichotomous CRM. A sensitivity analysis of the new design compares various target DLT rates, sample sizes, and cohort sizes. This design is also assessed under various dose-toxicity relationship models including POMs as well as those that violate the proportional odds assumption. A simulation study shows that the proportional odds CRM performs as well as the dichotomous CRM on all criteria compared (including safety criteria such as percentage of patients treated at highly toxic or suboptimal dose levels) and with improved estimation of the maximum tolerated dose when the PO assumption is not violated. These findings suggest that it is beneficial to incorporate ordinal toxicity endpoints into phase I trial designs.

摘要

目前,许多剂量探索临床试验设计,包括连续再评估方法(CRM)和标准的“3+3”设计,都是根据预先指定的剂量限制毒性(DLT)标准将毒性结果二值化。由于 I 期试验的样本量较小,这种信息丢失特别低效。常见毒性标准(CTCAEv3.0)将不良事件分为 1-5 级,从 1 级表示轻度不良事件到 5 级表示与不良事件相关的死亡。在本文中,我们使用比例优势模型(POM)将 CRM 扩展为包括 CTCAEv3.0 规定的有序毒性结果,并将结果与二值化 CRM 进行比较。新设计的敏感性分析比较了各种目标 DLT 率、样本量和队列大小。该设计还在各种剂量-毒性关系模型下进行评估,包括 POM 以及违反比例优势假设的模型。一项模拟研究表明,在所有比较的标准(包括安全性标准,如接受高毒性或次优剂量水平治疗的患者百分比)上,比例优势 CRM 与二值化 CRM 表现相当,并且在未违反 PO 假设时,对最大耐受剂量的估计有所改善。这些发现表明,将有序毒性终点纳入 I 期临床试验设计是有益的。