Volume 64, Issue 3
Original Article

Bayesian optimal interval designs for phase I clinical trials

Suyu Liu

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Ying Yuan

Corresponding Author

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA

Address for correspondence: Ying Yuan, Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Unit 1411, 1400 Pressler Street, Houston, TX 77030, USA. E‐mail: yyuan@mdanderson.orgSearch for more papers by this author
First published: 05 December 2014
Citations: 58

Summary

In phase I trials, effectively treating patients and minimizing the chance of exposing them to subtherapeutic and overly toxic doses are clinicians' top priority. Motived by this practical consideration, we propose Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) designs to find the maximum tolerated dose and to minimize the probability of inappropriate dose assignments for patients. We show, both theoretically and numerically, that the BOIN design not only has superior finite and large sample properties but also can be easily implemented in a simple way similar to the traditional ‘3+3’ design. Compared with the well‐known continual reassessment method, the BOIN design yields comparable average performance to select the maximum tolerated dose but has a substantially lower risk of assigning patients to subtherapeutic and overly toxic doses. We apply the BOIN design to two cancer clinical trials.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 58

  • Flexible, rule-based dose escalation: The cohort-sequence design, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100541, (100541), (2020).
  • Keyboard design for phase I drug-combination trials, Contemporary Clinical Trials, 10.1016/j.cct.2020.105972, 92, (105972), (2020).
  • Fractional design: An alternative paradigm for late-onset toxicities in oncology dose-finding studies, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100650, (100650), (2020).
  • New approaches to therapeutic drug development for childhood cancers, Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 10.1097/MOP.0000000000000850, 32, 1, (35-40), (2020).
  • Novel Bayesian Adaptive Designs and Their Applications in Cancer Clinical Trials, Computational and Methodological Statistics and Biostatistics, 10.1007/978-3-030-42196-0_17, (395-426), (2020).
  • Design considerations for phase I/II dose finding clinical trials in Immuno-oncology and cell therapy, Contemporary Clinical Trials, 10.1016/j.cct.2020.106083, 96, (106083), (2020).
  • Radiotherapy Considerations and Strategic Approaches in Phase I Trials, Phase I Oncology Drug Development, 10.1007/978-3-030-47682-3, (283-296), (2020).
  • An Adaptive Bayesian Design for Personalized Dosing in a Cancer Prevention Trial, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 10.1016/j.amepre.2020.04.023, 59, 4, (e167-e173), (2020).
  • Bayesian adaptive linearization method for phase I drug combination trials with dimension reduction, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.2013, 19, 5, (561-582), (2020).
  • A dose-finding approach for genomic patterns in phase I trials, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2020.1744619, (1-20), (2020).
  • PA‐CRM: A continuous reassessment method for pediatric phase I oncology trials with concurrent adult trials, Biometrics, 10.1111/biom.13217, 0, 0, (2020).
  • A phase I dose-finding design with incorporation of historical information and adaptive shrinking boundaries, PLOS ONE, 10.1371/journal.pone.0237254, 15, 8, (e0237254), (2020).
  • Target toxicity design for phase I dose-finding, Statistical Theory and Related Fields, 10.1080/24754269.2020.1800331, (1-13), (2020).
  • Improving Dose-Finding for New Agents as Monotherapy and Add-On Therapy, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1080/19466315.2020.1784782, (1-7), (2020).
  • A comparative study of Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design with interval 3 + 3 (i3 + 3) design for phase I oncology dose-finding trials, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1080/19466315.2020.1811147, (1-21), (2020).
  • TEPI-2 and UBI: designs for optimal immuno-oncology and cell therapy dose finding with toxicity and efficacy, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2020.1814802, (1-14), (2020).
  • Checkerboard: a Bayesian efficacy and toxicity interval design for phase I/II dose-finding trials, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2020.1815033, (1-20), (2020).
  • A comparison of phase I dose-finding designs in clinical trials with monotonicity assumption violation, Clinical Trials, 10.1177/1740774520932130, (174077452093213), (2020).
  • TITE‐BOIN‐ET: Time‐to‐event Bayesian optimal interval design to accelerate dose‐finding based on both efficacy and toxicity outcomes, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.1995, 19, 3, (335-349), (2019).
  • Coherence principles in interval‐based dose finding, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.1974, 19, 2, (137-144), (2019).
  • An adaptive trial design to optimize dose‐schedule regimes with delayed outcomes, Biometrics, 10.1111/biom.13116, 76, 1, (304-315), (2019).
  • 2D (2 Dimensional) TEQR design for Determining the optimal Dose for safety and efficacy, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100461, 16, (100461), (2019).
  • Non‐parametric overdose control for dose finding in drug combination trials, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 10.1111/rssc.12349, 68, 4, (1111-1130), (2019).
  • Consequences of Performing Parallel Dose Finding Trials in Heterogeneous Groups of Patients, JNCI Cancer Spectrum, 10.1093/jncics/pkz013, 3, 2, (2019).
  • Evaluating the effects of design parameters on the performances of phase I trial designs, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100379, (100379), (2019).
  • A utility‐based Bayesian optimal interval (U‐BOIN) phase I/II design to identify the optimal biological dose for targeted and immune therapies, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.8361, 38, 28, (S5299-S5316), (2019).
  • Model-Assisted Designs for Early-Phase Clinical Trials: Simplicity Meets Superiority, JCO Precision Oncology, 10.1200/PO.19.00032, 3, (1-12), (2019).
  • The i3+3 design for phase I clinical trials, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2019.1636811, (1-11), (2019).
  • Bayesian clinical trials at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center: An update, Clinical Trials, 10.1177/1740774519871471, (174077451987147), (2019).
  • Evaluation of irrational dose assignment definitions using the continual reassessment method, Clinical Trials, 10.1177/1740774519873316, (174077451987331), (2019).
  • On the relative efficiency of model-assisted designs: a conditional approach, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2019.1632881, (1-15), (2019).
  • Time-to-event model-assisted designs for dose-finding trials with delayed toxicity, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxz007, (2019).
  • PoD-TPI: Probability-of-Decision Toxicity Probability Interval Design to Accelerate Phase I Trials, Statistics in Biosciences, 10.1007/s12561-019-09264-0, (2019).
  • Practical considerations for the implementation of adaptive designs for oncology Phase I dose-finding trials, Future Drug Discovery, 10.4155/fdd-2019-0021, (2019).
  • Semiparametric dose finding methods: special cases, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 10.1111/rssc.12308, 68, 2, (271-288), (2018).
  • gBOIN: a unified model‐assisted phase I trial design accounting for toxicity grades, and binary or continuous end points, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 10.1111/rssc.12263, 68, 2, (289-308), (2018).
  • Phase I Cancer Clinical Trial Design: Single and Combination Agents, Biopharmaceutical Applied Statistics Symposium, 10.1007/978-981-10-7829-3_8, (205-233), (2018).
  • Accelerating drug development in pediatric cancer: a novel Phase I study design of venetoclax in relapsed/refractory malignancies, Future Oncology, 10.2217/fon-2018-0121, 14, 21, (2115-2129), (2018).
  • The role of minimal sets in dose finding studies, Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, 10.1080/10485252.2018.1515430, 30, 4, (1016-1031), (2018).
  • Overall success rate of a safe and efficacious drug: Results using six phase 1 designs, each followed by standard phase 2 and 3 designs, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 10.1016/j.conctc.2018.08.010, 12, (40-50), (2018).
  • Bayesian Optimal Interval Design for Phase I Oncology Clinical Trials, The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata, 10.1177/1536867X1501500107, 15, 1, (110-120), (2018).
  • Impact of different model structure and prior distribution in continual reassessment method, Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 10.1080/03610918.2018.1476698, (1-15), (2018).
  • Phase 1 Trial of Amnion Cell Therapy for Ischemic Stroke, Frontiers in Neurology, 10.3389/fneur.2018.00198, 9, (2018).
  • Semiparametric dose finding methods, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 10.1111/rssb.12229, 79, 5, (1487-1508), (2017).
  • Random Walk and Parallel Crossing Bayesian Optimal Interval Design for Dose Finding with Combined Drugs, Frontiers of Biostatistical Methods and Applications in Clinical Oncology, 10.1007/978-981-10-0126-0, (21-35), (2017).
  • A Bayesian interval dose-finding design addressingOckham's razor: mTPI-2, Contemporary Clinical Trials, 10.1016/j.cct.2017.04.006, 58, (23-33), (2017).
  • A placebo-controlled Bayesian dose finding design based on continuous reassessment method with application to stroke research, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 10.1016/j.conctc.2017.05.002, 7, (11-17), (2017).
  • Systematic comparison of the statistical operating characteristics of various Phase I oncology designs, Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications, 10.1016/j.conctc.2016.11.006, 5, (34-48), (2017).
  • Nonparametric overdose control with late-onset toxicity in phase I clinical trials, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxw038, 18, 1, (180-194), (2016).
  • Novel dose-finding designs and considerations on practical implementations in oncology clinical trials, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2016.1148715, 27, 1, (44-55), (2016).
  • Bayesian Phase I/II Biomarker-Based Dose Finding for Precision Medicine With Molecularly Targeted Agents, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2016.1228534, 112, 518, (508-520), (2016).
  • Performance of toxicity probability interval based designs in contrast to the continual reassessment method, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7043, 36, 2, (291-300), (2016).
  • A practical Bayesian design to identify the maximum tolerated dose contour for drug combination trials, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7095, 35, 27, (4924-4936), (2016).
  • Robust Optimal Interval Design for High-Dimensional Dose Finding in Multi-agent Combination Trials, Advanced Statistical Methods in Data Science, 10.1007/978-981-10-2594-5_4, (55-74), (2016).
  • MIDAS: a practical Bayesian design for platform trials with molecularly targeted agents, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.6971, 35, 22, (3892-3906), (2016).
  • Bayesian optimal interval design for dose finding in drug-combination trials, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280215594494, 26, 5, (2155-2167), (2015).
  • Practical designs for Phase I combination studies in oncology, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2015.1092029, 26, 1, (150-166), (2015).
  • A simulation‐free approach to assessing the performance of the continual reassessment method, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.8746, 0, 0, (undefined).