Challenges in implementing model-based phase I designs in a grant-funded clinical trials unit.

Authors:
Eleni Frangou
Eleni Frangou
General Hospital of Athens
Greece
Jane Holmes
Jane Holmes
University of Wales College of Medicine
Sharon Love
Sharon Love
St Thomas's Hospital
United Kingdom
Maria Hawkins
Maria Hawkins
Princess Margaret Hospital
Canada

Trials 2017 Dec 28;18(1):620. Epub 2017 Dec 28.

CRUK MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Gray Laboratories, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus Research Building, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7DQ, UK.

Background: For a clinical trials unit to run its first model-based, phase I trial, the statistician, chief investigator, and trial manager must all acquire a new set of skills. These trials also require a different approach to funding and data collection.

Challenges And Discussion: From the statisticians' viewpoint, we highlight what is needed to move from running rule-based, early-phase trials to running a model-based phase I study as we experienced it in our trials unit located in the United Kingdom. Our example is CHARIOT, a dose-finding trial using the time-to-event continual reassessment method. It consists of three stages and aims to discover the maximum tolerated dose of the combination of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and the ataxia telangiectasia mutated Rad3-related inhibitor M6620 (previously known as VX-970) in patients with oesophageal cancer. We present the challenges we faced in designing this trial and how we overcame them as a way of demystifying the conduct of a model-based trial in a grant-funded clinical trials unit.

Conclusions: Although we appreciate that undertaking model-based trials requires additional time and effort, they are feasible to implement and, once suitable tools such as guiding publications and document templates become available, the design and set-up process will be easier and more efficient.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2389-2DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5746014PMC
December 2017
5 Reads

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

clinical trials
12
trials unit
12
model-based phase
12
grant-funded clinical
8
trials
7
model-based
5
trial
5
continual reassessment
4
requires additional
4
trial time-to-event
4
time-to-event continual
4
additional time
4
reassessment method
4
model-based trials
4
stages aims
4
undertaking model-based
4
three stages
4
consists three
4
trials requires
4
method consists
4

Similar Publications

Implementation of a two-group likelihood time-to-event continual reassessment method using SAS.

Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2015 Oct 16;121(3):189-96. Epub 2015 Jun 16.

Department of Biostatistics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, School of Public Health, 1665 University Blvd., Room 327, Birmingham, AL 35294-0022, USA.

Background And Objectives: Dose finding trials using model-based methods have the ability to handle the increasingly complex landscape being seen in clinical trials. Issues such as patient heterogeneity in trial populations are important to address in the designing of a trial in addition to the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Designs accommodating patient heterogeneity have been described using the continual reassessment method (CRM) and time-to-event CRM (TITE-CRM), yet, the implementation of these trials in practice have been limited. Read More

View Article
October 2015

A web tool for designing and conducting phase I trials using the continual reassessment method.

BMC Cancer 2018 02 5;18(1):133. Epub 2018 Feb 5.

Division of Translational Research & Applied Statistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 800717, Charlottesville, VA, USA.

Background: Broad implementation of model-based dose-finding methods, such as the continual reassessment method (CRM), has been limited, with traditional or modified 3 + 3 designs remaining in frequent use. Part of the reason is the lack of reliable, easy-to-use, and robust software tools for designing and implementing more efficient designs.

Results: With the aim of augmenting broader implementation of model-guided methods, we have developed a web application for the Bayesian CRM in the R programming language using the Shiny package. Read More

View Article
February 2018

Embracing model-based designs for dose-finding trials.

Br J Cancer 2017 Jul 29;117(3):332-339. Epub 2017 Jun 29.

Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, Stadium House, 68 Wood Lane, London W12 7RH, UK.

Background: Dose-finding trials are essential to drug development as they establish recommended doses for later-phase testing. We aim to motivate wider use of model-based designs for dose finding, such as the continual reassessment method (CRM).

Methods: We carried out a literature review of dose-finding designs and conducted a survey to identify perceived barriers to their implementation. Read More

View Article
July 2017

Dose-finding clinical trial design for ordinal toxicity grades using the continuation ratio model: an extension of the continual reassessment method.

Clin Trials 2012 Jun 30;9(3):303-13. Epub 2012 Apr 30.

Division of Cancer Biostatistics, Markey Cancer Center, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA.

Background: Various dose-finding clinical trial designs, including the continual reassessment method (CRM), dichotomize toxicity outcomes based on prespecified dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) criteria. This loss of toxicity information is particularly inefficient due to the small sample sizes in phase I trials, especially when Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v4.0) are an established ordinal toxicity grading classification already used in the clinical practice. Read More

View Article
June 2012