Dose escalation trials for identifying the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) is commonly considered in phase 1 cancer clinical research. For this purpose, an algorithm-based design such as a standard escalation design with traditional escalation rule (TER) and a model-based design such as the method of continued reassessment method (CRM) under a well-established dose toxicity model are commonly employed. In practice, relative merits and limitations of these two different types of designs are not fully understood. Besides, most dose escalation studies do not provide scientific justification for sample size and design selection. In this article, the validity and efficiency of these two different types of study designs are evaluated based on the criteria of the number of subjects expected, the number of DLT expected, the probability of correctly achieving the MTD, and the probability of overdosing. A case study regarding a radiation therapy for treatment of certain solid tumors is discussed to illustrate the criteria for design selection.
[1]
A. Spriet,et al.
Good practice of clinical drug trials
,
1992
.
[2]
Naitee Ting.
Dose Finding in Drug Development
,
2006
.
[3]
Y. Laberge.
Handbook of statistics in clinical oncology
,
2013
.
[4]
S. Chow,et al.
On the Assessment of Dose Proportionality: A Comparison of Two Slope Approaches
,
2006,
Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.
[5]
B E Storer,et al.
An evaluation of phase I clinical trial designs in the continuous dose–response setting
,
2001,
Statistics in medicine.
[6]
Donna P. Ankerst,et al.
Handbook of statistics in clinical oncology
,
2012
.
[7]
B E Storer,et al.
Small-sample confidence sets for the MTD in a phase I clinical trial.
,
1993,
Biometrics.