FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2162300921> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2162300921 endingPage "477" @default.
• W2162300921 startingPage "465" @default.
• W2162300921 abstract "Background An extensive literature has covered the statistical properties of the Continual Reassessment Method (CRM) and the modifications of this method. While there are some applications of CRM designs in recent Phase I trials, the standard method (SM) of escalating doses after three patients with an option for an additional three patients SM remains very popular, mainly due to its simplicity. From a practical perspective, clinicians are interested in designs that can estimate the MTD using fewer patients for a fixed number of doses, or can test more dose levels for a given sample size. Purpose This article compares CRM-based methods with the SM in terms of the number of patients needed to reach the MTD, total sample size required, and trial duration. Methods The comparisons are performed under two alternative schemes: a fixed or a varying sample approach with the implementation of a stopping rule. The stopping rule halts the trial if the confidence interval around the MTD is within a pre-specified bound. Our simulations evaluated several CRM-based methods under different scenarios by varying the number of dose levels from five to eight and the location of the true MTD. Results CRM and SM are comparable in terms of how fast they reach the MTD and the total sample size required when testing a limited number of dose levels (≤5), but as the number of dose levels increases, CRM reaches the MTD in fewer patients when used with a fixed sample of 20 patients. However, a sample size of 20—25 patients is not sufficient to achieve a narrow precision around the estimated toxicity rate at the MTD. Limitations We focused on methods with practical design features that are of interest to clinicians. However, there are several alternative CRM-based designs that are not investigated in this manuscript, and hence our results are not generalizable to other designs. Conclusions We show that CRM-based methods are an improvement over the SM in terms of accuracy and optimal dose allocation in almost all cases, except when the true dose is among the lower levels. Clinical Trials 2008; 5: 465—477. http://ctj.sagepub.com" @default.
• W2162300921 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2162300921 creator A5001429608 @default.
• W2162300921 creator A5041344703 @default.
• W2162300921 creator A5050512386 @default.
• W2162300921 creator A5064079432 @default.
• W2162300921 creator A5073323475 @default.
• W2162300921 date "2008-09-30" @default.
• W2162300921 modified "2023-10-11" @default.
• W2162300921 title "A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies" @default.
• W2162300921 cites W157796586 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W1972747033 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W1973396713 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W1976397576 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W1991092971 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2001278210 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2013823495 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2021225758 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2045985885 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2058011043 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2064122822 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2075236916 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2076108528 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2084986158 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2085820540 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2098980231 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2103105040 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2118701470 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2119597015 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2125102557 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2125300671 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2128729061 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2144946553 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2149344761 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2158740848 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2165524738 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2312270541 @default.
• W2162300921 cites W2324021516 @default.
• W2162300921 doi "https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774508096474" @default.
• W2162300921 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/2637378" @default.
• W2162300921 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18827039" @default.
• W2162300921 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W2162300921 type Work @default.
• W2162300921 sameAs 2162300921 @default.
• W2162300921 citedByCount "149" @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212012 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212013 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212014 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212015 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212016 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212017 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212018 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212019 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212020 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212021 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212022 @default.
• W2162300921 countsByYear W21623009212023 @default.
• W2162300921 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2162300921 hasAuthorship W2162300921A5001429608 @default.
• W2162300921 hasAuthorship W2162300921A5041344703 @default.
• W2162300921 hasAuthorship W2162300921A5050512386 @default.
• W2162300921 hasAuthorship W2162300921A5064079432 @default.
• W2162300921 hasAuthorship W2162300921A5073323475 @default.
• W2162300921 hasBestOaLocation W21623009211 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C129848803 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C183905921 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C198531522 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C2777334693 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C43617362 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C50644808 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C535046627 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C5465570 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C105795698 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C126322002 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C129848803 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C154945302 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C183905921 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C185592680 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C198531522 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C2777334693 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C33923547 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C41008148 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C43617362 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C44249647 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C50644808 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C535046627 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C5465570 @default.
• W2162300921 hasConceptScore W2162300921C71924100 @default.
• W2162300921 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2162300921 hasLocation W21623009211 @default.

• next