View Item 

Show simple item record

A simulation‐free approach to assessing the performance of the continual reassessment method
dc.contributor.authorBraun, Thomas M.
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-05T18:49:03Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_12_MONTHS
dc.date.available2021-01-05T18:49:03Z
dc.date.issued2020-12-30
dc.identifier.citationBraun, Thomas M. (2020). "A simulation‐free approach to assessing the performance of the continual reassessment method." Statistics in Medicine 39(30): 4651-4666.
dc.identifier.issn0277-6715
dc.identifier.issn1097-0258
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/163956
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherBayesian methods
dc.subject.otheradaptive clinical trial
dc.subject.otherconsistency
dc.subject.otherdose‐finding trial
dc.subject.othernonparametric optimal design
dc.subject.otherPhase I trial
dc.titleA simulation‐free approach to assessing the performance of the continual reassessment method
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelStatistics and Numeric Data
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPublic Health
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScience
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciences
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163956/1/sim8746.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163956/2/sim8746_am.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/sim.8746
dc.identifier.sourceStatistics in Medicine
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLee SM, Cheung YK. Calibration of prior variance in the Bayesian continual reassessment method. Stat Med. 2011; 30: 2081 ‐ 2089.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceInfante JR, Dees EC, Olszanski AJ, et al. Phase I dose‐escalation study of LCL161, an oral inhibitor of apoptosis proteins inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32: 3103 ‐ 3110.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBraun TM. The bivariate continual reassessment method: extending the CRM to phase I trials of two competing outcomes. Control Clin Trials. 2002; 23: 240 ‐ 256.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWages N, O’Quigley J, Conaway M. Continual reassessment method for partial ordering. Biometrics. 2011; 67: 1555 ‐ 1563.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method in phase I clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc. 2009; 104: 954 ‐ 968.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCheung Y, Chappell R. Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late‐onset toxicities. Biometrics. 2000; 56: 1177 ‐ 1182.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStorer BE. Design and analysis of phase I clinical trials. Biometrics. 1989; 45: 925 ‐ 937.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCheung YK, Chappell R. A simple technique to evaluate model sensitivity in the continual reassessment method. Biometrics. 2002; 58: 671 ‐ 674.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO’Quigley J. Theoretical study of the continual reassessment method. J Stat Plan Inference. 2006; 136: 1765 ‐ 1780.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO’Quigley J, Paoletti X, Maccario J. Non‐parametric optimal design in dose finding studies. Biostatistics. 2002; 3: 51 ‐ 56.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLee SM, Cheung YK. Model calibration in the continual reassessment method. Clin Trials. 2009; 6: 227 ‐ 238.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJames GD, Symeonides SN, Marshall J, Young J, Clack G. Continual reassessment method for dose escalation clinical trials in oncology: a comparison of prior skeleton approaches using AZD3514 data. BMC Cancer. 2016; 16: 703.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOron AP, Azriel D, Hoff P. Dose‐finding designs: the role of convergence properties. Int J Biostat. 2011; 7: 39.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAzriel D, Mandel M, Rinott Y. The treatment versus experimentation dilemma in dose finding studies. J Stat Plan Inference. 2011; 141: 2759 ‐ 2768.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNeuenschwander B, Branson M, Gsponer T. Critical aspects of the Bayesian approach to phase I cancer trials. Stat Med. 2008; 27: 2420 ‐ 2439.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBraun TM, Jia N. A generalized continual reassessment method for two‐agent phase I trials. Stat Biopharm Res. 2013; 5: 105 ‐ 115.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBraun TM. The current design of oncology phase I clinical trials: progressing from algorithms to statistical models. Chin Clin Oncol. 2014; 3: 2.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIvanova A, Flournoy N, Chung Y. Cumulative cohort design for dose‐finding. J Stat Plan Inference. 2007; 137: 2316 ‐ 2327.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOron AP, Hoff PD. The k‐in‐a‐row up‐and‐down design, revisited. Stat Med. 2009; 28: 1805 ‐ 1820.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLiu S, Yuan Y. Bayesian optimal interval designs for phase I clinical trials. J Royal Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2015; 64: 507 ‐ 523.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJi Y, Wang SJ. Modified toxicity probability interval design: a safer and more reliable method than the 3+3 design for practical phase I trials. J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31: 1785 ‐ 1791.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBabb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S. Cancer phase I clinical trials: efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat Med. 1998; 17: 1103 ‐ 1120.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO’Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: a practial design for phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics. 1990; 46: 33 ‐ 48.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGarrett‐Mayer E. The continual reassessment method for dose‐finding studies: a tutorial. Clin Trials. 2006; 3: 57 ‐ 71.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWheeler GM, Mander AP, Bedding A, et al. How to design a dose‐finding study using the continual reassessment method. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019; 19: 18.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoodman S, Zahurak M, Piantadosi S. Some pratical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med. 1995; 14: 1149 ‐ 1161.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCheung K. dfcrm: Dose‐Finding by the Continual Reassessment Method R package version 0.2‐2. 2013.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWages NA, Petroni GR. A web tool for designing and conducting phase I trials using the continual reassessment method. BMC Cancer. 2018; 18: 133.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCheung YK. Sample size formulae for the Bayesian continual reassessment method. Clin Trials. 2013; 10: 852 ‐ 861.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBraun TM. Motivating sample sizes in adaptive phase I trials via Bayesian posterior credible intervals. Biometrics. 2018; 74: 1065 ‐ 1071.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShen LZ, O’Quigley J. Consistency of continual reassessment method under model misspecification. Biometrika. 1996; 83: 395 ‐ 405.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
sim8746.pdf
Size:
839.2KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
sim8746_am.pdf
Size:
435.8KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.