Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5351/CKSS.2011.18.5.581

Continual Reassessment Method in Phase I Clinical Trials for Leukemia Patients  

Lee, Joo-Hyoung (Department of Medical Life Sciences, Division of Biostatistics, Catholic University)
Song, Hae-Hiang (Department of Medical Life Sciences, Division of Biostatistics, Catholic University)
Publication Information
Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods / v.18, no.5, 2011 , pp. 581-594 More about this Journal
Abstract
The traditional method of 3+3 standard design and model-based Bayesian continual reassessment method (CRM) are commonly used in Phase I clinical trials to identify the maximal tolerated dose(MTD) of a new drug. In this paper we review clinical examples of Phase I trials that were carried out in patients with refractory or relapsed leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome. The recently proposed 3+1+1 design and rolling-6 design can shorten the trial duration, when a very slow accrual of patients with a simple 3+3 standard design may result in the untimely termination of trials. Too conservative approaches in determining the dose levels in Phase I clinical trials can leave clinical investigators unable to accurately determine the MTD. When determining future patient doses, the designs that use a time-to-event CRM can cooperate late toxicities by accounting for the proportion of the observation period of each enrolled patient. With the CRM design, simulations under different scenarios during the trial are important in detecting the under- or over-estimation of the initial estimate of the dose-limiting toxicity rate for each dose level. We present the advantages and drawbacks of the designs used in Phase I clinical trials for leukemia patients.
Keywords
Phase I clinical trial; maximal tolerated dose; standard design; continual reassessment method; leukemia;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Wetherill, G. B. (1963). Sequential estimation of quantal response curves (with discussion), Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 25, 1-48.
2 Ahn, C. (1998). An evaluation of phase I cancer clinical trial designs, Statistics in Medicine, 17, 1537-1549.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Attia, S., Morgan-Meadows, S., Holen, K. D., Bailey, H. H., Eickhoff, J. C., Schelman, W. R., Traynor, A. M., Mulkerin, D. L., Campbell, T. C., McFarland, T. A., Huie, M. S., Cleary, J. F., Tevaarwerk, A. J., Alberti, D. B., Wilding, G. and Liu, G. (2009). Dose-escalation study of fixed-dose rate gemcitabine combined with capecitabine in advanced solid malignancies, Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology, 64, 45-51.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Tevaarwerk, A., Wilding, G., Eickhoff, J., Chappell, R., Sidor, C., Arnott, J., Bailey, H., Schelman, W. and Liu, G. (2011). Phase I study of continuous MKC-1 in patients with advanced or metastatic solid malignancies using the modified time-to-event continual reassessment method (TITE-CRM) dose escalation design, Investigative New Drugs, Published online: 12 January.
5 Rogatko, A., Babb, J. S., Tighiouart, M., Khuri, F. R. and Hudes, G. (2005). New paradigm in dose-finding trials: Patient-specific dosing and beyond phase I, Clinical Cancer Research, 11, 5342-5346.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Tighiouart, M., Rogatko, A. and Babb, J. S. (2005). Flexible Bayesian methods for cancer phase I clinical trials: dose escalation with overdose control, Statistics in Medicine, 24, 2183-2196.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Song, D. Y., Jones, R. J., Welsh, J. S., Haulk, T. L., Korman, L. T., Noga, S., Goodman, S., Herman, M., Mann, R., Marcellus, D., Vogelsang, G., Ambinder, R. F. and Abrams, R. A. (2003). Phase I study of escalating doses of low-dose-rate, locoregional irradiation preceding cytoxan-TBI for patients with chemotherapy-resistant non-Hodgkin's or Hodgkin's lymphoma, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 57, 166-171.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Storer, B. E. (1989). Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials, Biometrics, 45, 925-937.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Storer, B. E. (2001). An evaluation of phase I clinical trial designs in the continuous dose-response setting, Statistics in Medicine, 20, 2399-2408.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Skolnik, J. M., Barrett, J. S., Jayaraman, B., Patel, D. and Adamson, P. C. (2008). Shortening the timeline of pediatric phase I trials: The rolling six design, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26, 190-195.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Lee, D. P., Skolnik, J. M. and Adamson, P. C. (2005). Pediatric phase I trials in oncology: An analysis of study conduct efficiency, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 8431-8441.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Simon, R., Freidlin, B., Rubinstein, L., Arbuck, S. G. and Christian, M. C. (1997). Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical trials in oncology, Journal of National Cancer Institute, 89, 1138-1147.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Siu, L. L., Rowinsky, E. K., Hammond, L. A., Weiss, G. R., Hidalgo, M., Clark, G. M., Moczygemba, J., Choi, L., Linnartz, R., Barbet, N. C., Sklenar, I. T., Capdeville, R., Gan, G., Porter, C.W., Von Hoff, D. D. and Eckhardt, S. G. (2002). A Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of SAM486A, a novel polyamine biosynthesis inhibitor, administered on a daily-times-five every-three-week schedule in patients with advanced solid malignancies, Clinical Cancer Research, 8, 2157-2166.
14 Park, I. H. and Song, H. H. (1999). Estimation of maximal tolerated dose in sequential phase I clinical trials, The Korean Communications, 6, 543-564.   과학기술학회마을
15 Piantadosi, S., Fisher, J. D. and Grossman, S. (1998). Practical implementation of a modified continual reassessment method for dose-finding trials, Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology, 41, 429-436.   DOI
16 O'Quigley, J. and Chevret, S. (1991). Methods for dose finding studies in cancer clinical trials: A review and results of a monte carlo study, Statistics in Medicine, 10, 1647-1664.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 O'Quigley, J., Pepe, M. and Fisher, L. (1990). Continual reassessment method: A practical design for phase I clinical trials in cancer, Biometrics, 46, 33-48.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 O'Donnell, P. V., Luznik, L., Jones, R. J., Vogelsang, G. B., Leffell, M. S., Phelps, M., Rhubart, P., Cowan, K., Piantados, S. and Fuchs, E. J. (2002). Nonmyeloablative bone marrow transplantation from partially HLA-mismatched related donors using posttransplantation cyclophosphamide, Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, 8, 377-386.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Onar-Thomas, A. and Xiong, Z. (2010). A simulation-based comparison of the traditional method, rolling-6 design and a frequentist version of the continual reassessment method with special attention to trial duration in pediatric phase I oncology trials, Contemporary Clinical Trials, 31, 259-270.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Korn, E. L., Midthune, D., Chen, T. T., Rubinstein, L. V., Christian, M. C. and Simon, R. M. (1994). A comparison of two phase I trial designs, Statistics in Medicine, 13, 1799-1806.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Lonial, S., Kaufman, J., Tighiouart, M., Nooka, A., Langston, A. A., Heffner, L. T., Torre, C., McMillan, S., Renfroe, H., Harvey, R. D., Lechowicz, M. J., Khoury, H. J., Flowers, C. R. and Waller, E. K. (2010). A phase I/II trial combining high-dose melphalan and autologous transplant with bortezomib for multiple myeloma: A dose- and schedule-finding study, Clinical Cancer Research, 16, 5079-5086.   DOI
22 Mick, R. and Ratain, M. J. (1993). Model-Guided determination of maximum tolerated dose in phase I clinical trials: Evidence for increased precision, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85, 217-223.   DOI
23 Normolle, D. and Lawrence, T. (2006). Designing dose-escalation trials with late-onset toxicities using the time-to-event continual reassessment method, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24, 4426-4433.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Gerke, O. and Siedentop, H. (2008). Optimal phase I dose-escalation trial designs in oncology-a simulation study, Statistics in Medicine, 27, 5329-5344.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Goodman, S. N., Zahurak, M. L. and Piantadosi, S. (1995). Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies, Statistics in Medicine, 14, 1149-1161.   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Kantarjian, H., Garcia-Manero, G., O'Brien, S., Faderl, S., Ravandi, F.,Westwood, R., Green, S. R., Chiao, J. H., Boone, P. A., Cortes, J. and Plunkett, W. (2010). Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of oral sapacitabine in patients with acute leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28, 285-291.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Cheung, Y. K. and Chappell, R. (2000). Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late-onset toxicities, Biometrics, 56, 1177-1182.   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Dixon, W. J. and Mood, A. M. (1948). A method for obtaining and analyzing sensitivity data, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 43, 109-126.   DOI
29 Fiedler, W., Mesters, R., Heuser, M., Ehninger, G., Berdelb, W. E., Zirrgiebele, U., Robertsonf, J. D., Puchalskig, T. A., Collinsf, B., Jurgensmeierf, J. M. and Serve, H. (2010). An open-label, phase I study of cediranib (RECENTIN tm) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia, Leukemia Research, 34, 196-202.   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Babb, J., Rogatko, A. and Zacks, S. (1998). Cancer phase I clinical trials: Efficient dose escalation with overdose control, Statistics in Medicine, 17, 1103-1120.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Babb, J. S. and Rogatko, A. (2001). Patient specific dosing in a cancer phase I clinical trial, Statistics in Medicine, 20, 2079-2090.   DOI   ScienceOn
32 Yamamoto, K., Utsunomiya, A., Tobinai, K., Tsukasaki, K., Uike, N., Uozumi, K., Yamaguchi, K., Yamada, Y., Hanada, S., Tamura, K., Nakamura, S., Inagaki, H., Ohshima, K., Kiyoi, H., Ishida, T., Matsushima, K., Akinaga, S., Ogura, M., Tomonaga, M. and Ueda, R. (2010). Phase I study of KW-0761, a defucosylated humanized anti-CCR4 antibody, in relapsed patients with adult T-cell leukemia-lymphoma and peripheral T-cell lymphoma, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28, 1591-1598.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Brochstein, J. A., Grupp, S., Yang, H., Pillemer, S. R. and Geba, G. P. (2010). Phase-1 study of siplizumab in the treatment of pediatric patients with at least grade II newly diagnosed acute graft-versus-host disease, Pediatric Transplantation, 14, 233-241.   DOI   ScienceOn