Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pharmaceutical Medicine 1/2008

01-01-2008 | Review Article

Dose Estimation

A Key Step in Malignancies Drug Development

Authors: Dr Sarah Zohar, Vincent Levy

Published in: Pharmaceutical Medicine | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

This paper presents state-of-the-art statistical methods for dose-finding experiments in first-in-man clinical studies of drugs for the treatment of malignancies. Most early-phase clinical trials are not hypothesis driven, which might be the reason why statistical considerations have been largely ignored in dose-finding studies. The standard experimental design for dose-finding clinical studies employs a rule-based, dose-escalation scheme in which escalation depends on the number of patients at a dose level who experience dose-limiting toxicity. The standard design is widely used because of its algorithm-based simplicity for clinical investigators.
In the last two decades, new approaches for dose-finding have been proposed, all aiming to (i) model the toxicity of a new treatment as a percentile of the dose-toxicity relationship; (ii) minimize the number of patients treated at unacceptably high toxic dose levels; and (iii) minimize the number of patients needed to complete the study. In this paper, we describe some of these methodologies in simple terms for nonstatisticians.
Footnotes
1
A gain function is the mathematical representation in Bayesian decision theory of an improving situation1
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Reigner BG, Blesch KS. Estimating the starting dose for entry into humans: principles and practice. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 57 (12): 835–45PubMedCrossRef Reigner BG, Blesch KS. Estimating the starting dose for entry into humans: principles and practice. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 57 (12): 835–45PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Zhou Y. Choice of designs and doses for early phase trials. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2004; 18 (3): 373–8PubMedCrossRef Zhou Y. Choice of designs and doses for early phase trials. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2004; 18 (3): 373–8PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Chevret S. Statistical methods for dose-finding experiments: statistics in practice. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2006CrossRef Chevret S. Statistical methods for dose-finding experiments: statistics in practice. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2006CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Rosenberger WF, Haines LM. Competing designs for phase I clinical trials: a review. Stat Med 2002; 21 (18): 2757–70PubMedCrossRef Rosenberger WF, Haines LM. Competing designs for phase I clinical trials: a review. Stat Med 2002; 21 (18): 2757–70PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference O’Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 1990; 46 (1): 33–48PubMedCrossRef O’Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 1990; 46 (1): 33–48PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Whitehead J, Brunier H. Bayesian decision procedures for dose determining experiments. Stat Med 1995; 14 (9–10): 885–93; discussion 895–9PubMedCrossRef Whitehead J, Brunier H. Bayesian decision procedures for dose determining experiments. Stat Med 1995; 14 (9–10): 885–93; discussion 895–9PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Babb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S. Cancer phase I clinical trials: efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat Med 1998; 17 (10): 1103–20PubMedCrossRef Babb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S. Cancer phase I clinical trials: efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat Med 1998; 17 (10): 1103–20PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Shih WJ, Lin Y. Traditional and modified algorithm-based designs for phase I cancer clinical trials. In: Chevret S, editor. Statistical methods for dose-finding experiments. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2006: 61–90 Shih WJ, Lin Y. Traditional and modified algorithm-based designs for phase I cancer clinical trials. In: Chevret S, editor. Statistical methods for dose-finding experiments. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2006: 61–90
9.
go back to reference O’Quigley J, Zohar S. Experimental designs for phase I and phase I/II dose-finding studies. Br J Cancer 2006; 94 (5): 609–13PubMed O’Quigley J, Zohar S. Experimental designs for phase I and phase I/II dose-finding studies. Br J Cancer 2006; 94 (5): 609–13PubMed
10.
go back to reference Faries D. Practical modifications of the continual reassessment method for phase I cancer clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat 1994; 4 (2): 147–64PubMedCrossRef Faries D. Practical modifications of the continual reassessment method for phase I cancer clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat 1994; 4 (2): 147–64PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Goodman SN, Zahurak ML, Piantadosi S. Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med 1995; 14 (11): 1149–61PubMedCrossRef Goodman SN, Zahurak ML, Piantadosi S. Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med 1995; 14 (11): 1149–61PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Korn EL, Midthune D, Chen TT, et al. A comparison of two phase I trial designs. Stat Med 1994; 13 (18): 1799–806PubMedCrossRef Korn EL, Midthune D, Chen TT, et al. A comparison of two phase I trial designs. Stat Med 1994; 13 (18): 1799–806PubMedCrossRef
13.
14.
go back to reference Simon R, Freidlin B, Rubinstein L, et al. Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89 (15): 1138–47PubMedCrossRef Simon R, Freidlin B, Rubinstein L, et al. Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89 (15): 1138–47PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Dancey J, Freidlin B, Rubinstein LV. Accelerated titration designs. In: Chevret S, editor. Statistical methods for dose-finding experiments. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2006: 91–113CrossRef Dancey J, Freidlin B, Rubinstein LV. Accelerated titration designs. In: Chevret S, editor. Statistical methods for dose-finding experiments. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2006: 91–113CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Rosenberger WF. New directions in adaptive designs. Stat Sci 1996; 11 (2): 137–49CrossRef Rosenberger WF. New directions in adaptive designs. Stat Sci 1996; 11 (2): 137–49CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Gasparini M, Eisele J. A curve-free method for phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 2000; 56 (2): 609–15PubMedCrossRef Gasparini M, Eisele J. A curve-free method for phase I clinical trials. Biometrics 2000; 56 (2): 609–15PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Rogatko A, Babb JS, Tighiouart M, et al. New paradigm in dose-finding trials: patient-specific dosing and beyond phase I. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11 (15): 5342–6PubMedCrossRef Rogatko A, Babb JS, Tighiouart M, et al. New paradigm in dose-finding trials: patient-specific dosing and beyond phase I. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11 (15): 5342–6PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Whitehead J, Williamson D. Bayesian decision procedures based on logistic regression models for dose-finding studies. J Biopharm Stat 1998; 8 (3): 445–67PubMedCrossRef Whitehead J, Williamson D. Bayesian decision procedures based on logistic regression models for dose-finding studies. J Biopharm Stat 1998; 8 (3): 445–67PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
go back to reference O’Quigley J, Hughes MD, Fenton T. Dose-finding designs for HIV studies. Biometrics 2001; 57 (4): 1018–29PubMedCrossRef O’Quigley J, Hughes MD, Fenton T. Dose-finding designs for HIV studies. Biometrics 2001; 57 (4): 1018–29PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Thall PF, Cook JD. Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics 2004; 60 (3): 684–93PubMedCrossRef Thall PF, Cook JD. Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics 2004; 60 (3): 684–93PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Whitehead J, Zhou Y, Stevens J, et al. An evaluation of a bayesian method of dose escalation based on bivariate binary responses. J Biopharm Stat 2004; 14 (4): 969–83PubMedCrossRef Whitehead J, Zhou Y, Stevens J, et al. An evaluation of a bayesian method of dose escalation based on bivariate binary responses. J Biopharm Stat 2004; 14 (4): 969–83PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Zohar S, O’Quigley J. Identifying the most successful dose (MSD) in dose-finding studies in cancer. Pharm Stat 2006; 5 (3): 187–99PubMedCrossRef Zohar S, O’Quigley J. Identifying the most successful dose (MSD) in dose-finding studies in cancer. Pharm Stat 2006; 5 (3): 187–99PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Zohar S, Chevret S. Recent developments in adaptive designs for phase I/II dose- finding studies. J Biopharm Stat. In press Zohar S, Chevret S. Recent developments in adaptive designs for phase I/II dose- finding studies. J Biopharm Stat. In press
26.
go back to reference Levy V, Zohar S, Bardin C, et al. A phase I dose-finding and pharmacokinetic study of subcutaneous semisynthetic homoharringtonine (ssHHT) in patients with advanced acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Cancer 2006; 95 (3): 253–9PubMedCrossRef Levy V, Zohar S, Bardin C, et al. A phase I dose-finding and pharmacokinetic study of subcutaneous semisynthetic homoharringtonine (ssHHT) in patients with advanced acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Cancer 2006; 95 (3): 253–9PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Zohar S, O’Quigley J. Optimal designs for estimating the most successful dose. Stat Med 2006; 25 (24): 4311–20PubMedCrossRef Zohar S, O’Quigley J. Optimal designs for estimating the most successful dose. Stat Med 2006; 25 (24): 4311–20PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Rogatko A, Babb JS, Wang H, et al. Patient characteristics compete with dose as predictors of acute treatment toxicity in early phase clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10 (14): 4645–51PubMedCrossRef Rogatko A, Babb JS, Wang H, et al. Patient characteristics compete with dose as predictors of acute treatment toxicity in early phase clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10 (14): 4645–51PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Dose Estimation
A Key Step in Malignancies Drug Development
Authors
Dr Sarah Zohar
Vincent Levy
Publication date
01-01-2008
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Pharmaceutical Medicine / Issue 1/2008
Print ISSN: 1178-2595
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1993
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03256680

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

Pharmaceutical Medicine 1/2008 Go to the issue

Update

Forum