An R package UnifiedDoseFinding for continuous and ordinal outcomes in Phase I dose-finding trials |
Pan, Haitao
(Department of Biostatistics, St Jude Children's Research Hospital)
Mu, Rongji (Clinical Research Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine) Hsu, Chia-Wei (Department of Biostatistics, St Jude Children's Research Hospital) Zhou, Shouhao (Department of Public Health Sciences, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine) |
1 | 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 |
2 | Storer BE (1989). Design and analysis of Phase I clinical trials, Biometrics, 45, 925-937. DOI |
3 | Yuan Z, Chappell R, and Bailey H (2007). The continual reassessment method for multiple toxicity grades: a bayesian Quasi-likelihood approach, Biometrics, 63, 173-179. DOI |
4 | Frankel PH, Chung V, Xing Y, Longmate J, Groshen S, and Newman EM (2020). Untenable dosing: A common pitfall of modern DLT-targeting Phase I designs in oncology, Current Problems in Cancer, 44, 100583. |
5 | Brahmer JR, Charles GD, Ira W, et al. (2010). Phase I study of single-agent anti-programmed death-1 (MDX-1106) in refractory solid tumors: safety, clinical activity, pharmacodynamics, and immunologic correlates, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 8, 3167. |
6 | Dent SF and Eisenhauer EA (1996). Phase I trial design: are new methodologies being put into practice?, Annals of Oncology, 7, 561-566. DOI |
7 | Fiteni F, Le Ray I, Ousmen A, Isambert N, Anota A, and Bonnetain F (2019). Health-related quality of life as an endpoint in oncology phase I trials: a systematic review, BMC Cancer, 19, 1-8. DOI |
8 | Ivanova A and Kim SH (2009) Dose finding for continuous and ordinal outcomes with a monot objective function: a unified approach, Biometrics, 65, 307-315. DOI |
9 | Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, and Siu LL (2009). Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials, JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 101, 708-720. DOI |
10 | Lee SM, Hershman DL, Martin P, Leonard JP, and Cheung YK (2012). Toxicity burden score: a novel approach to summarize multiple toxic effects, Annals of Oncology, 3, 537-541. |
11 | Liu S and Yuan Y (2015). Bayesian optimal interval designs for phase I clinical trials, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics),64, 507-523. DOI |
12 | Meille C, Guerreiro N, Jullion A, et al. (2017). Abstract CT154: Optimization of the dose and schedule of an HDM2 inhibitor NVP-HDM201 in a first-in-human Phase I study using a mechanism- based PK/PD model, Cancer Research, 77, CT154. |
13 | Pan H, Zhu C, Zhang F, et al. (2014). The continual reassessment method for multiple toxicity grades: a Bayesian model selection approach, PloS One, 9, e98147. |
14 | Mu R, Yuan Y, Xu J, Mandrekar SJ, and Yin J (2019). 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), 68, 289-308. DOI |
15 | Muenz D (2017). New statistical methods for phase I clinical trials of a single agent (Doctoral dissertation), The University of Michigan, Michigan. |
16 | National Cancer Institute: CTEP. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 3.0. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health 2003. |
17 | Meter EMV, Elizabeth GM, and Dipankar B (2011). Proportional odds model for dose -finding clinical trial designs with ordinal toxicity grading, Statistics in Medicine, 30, 2070-2080. DOI |
18 | Paoletti X, Le Tourneau C, Verweij J, et al. (2014). Defining dose-limiting toxicity for phase 1 trials of molecularly targeted agents: results of a DLT-TARGETT international survey, European Journal of Cancer, 50, 2050-2056. DOI |
19 | Papke L and Wooldrige J (1996). Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(k) plan participation rates, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11, 619-632. DOI |
20 | Yin G and Yuan Y (2009). Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method in Phase I clinical trials, Journal of the American Statistical Assoication, 104, 954-968. DOI |
21 | Plummer R, Jones C, Middleton M, et al. (2008). Phase I study of the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, AG014699, in combination with temozolomide in patients with advanced solid tumors, Clinical Cancer Research, 14, 7917-7923. DOI |
22 | Friedman HS, Kokkinakis DM, Pluda J, et al. (1998). Phase I trial of O6-benzylguanine for patients undergoing surgery for malignant glioma, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16, 3570-3575. DOI |
23 | Yin J, Du Y, Qin R, Shen S, and Mandrekar S (2021). phase1RMD: An R package for repeated measures dose-finding designs with novel toxicity and efficacy endpoints, Plos One, 16, e0256391. |
24 | Zhang L, Yu Q, Wu XC, Hsieh MC, Loch M, Chen VW, Fontham E, and Ferguson T (2018). Impact of chemotherapy relative dose intensity on cause-specific and overall survival for stage I-III breast cancer: ER+/PR+, HER2-vs. triple-negative, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 169, 175-187. DOI |
25 | Bekele BN and Thall PF (2004). Dose-finding based on multiple toxicities in a soft tissue sarcoma trial, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 99, 26-35. DOI |
26 | Ezzalfani M, Zohar S, Qin R, Mandrekar SJ, and Deley MCL (2013). Dose-finding designs using a novel quasi-continuous endpoint for multiple toxicities, Statistics in Medicine, 32, 2728-2746. DOI |