The continual reassessment method for dose-finding studies: a tutorial

Abstract

The Continual Reassessment Method (CRM), along with other adaptive dose-finding study designs, has gained popularity since its proposal by O'Quigley. Several of the reasons it has been embraced by clinical trialists is that it tends to incur fewer toxic events, and more accurately estimate the maximum tolerated dose as compared to the standard Phase I dose escalation designs. Many variations have been published and discussed in the statistical literature, but there has not been as much practical advice for choosing design parameters and implementing the CRM. As a result, the CRM has not been as widely utilized as it could be for dose-finding studies. The goal of this paper is to provide a tutorial for those unfamiliar with the CRM who are either statisticians considering using the CRM for the first time, or investigators with some statistical background. This paper presents the original CRM, and then some of its modified versions. It also explains the specifications that define a CRM design, along with simulated examples of CRMs and standard designs, for illustration.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. O'Quigley JO , Pepe M , Fisher L . Continual reassessment method: a practical design for phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 1990; 46: 33–48.

2. Korn E , Midthune D , Chen T , Rubinstein L , Christian MC , Simon R . A comparison of two phase I trial designs. Stat Med 1994; 13: 1799–1806.

3. Ratain M , Mick R , Schilsky RL , Siegler M .Statistical and ethical issues in the design and conduct of phase I and II clinical trials of new anticancer agents. J Nat Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 1637–1143.

4. Storer BE . An evaluation of phase I clinical trial designs in the continuous dose-response setting. Stat Med 2001; 20: 2399–2408.

5. Ahn C . An evaluation of phase I cancer clinical trial designs. Stat Med 1998; 17: 1537–1149.

6. Goodman SN , Zahurak ML , Piantadosi S . Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med 1995; 14: 1149–1161.

7. Thall P , Cook J . Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics 2004; 60: 684–693.

8. Faries D . Practical modifications of the continual reassessment method for phase I cancer clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat 1994; 4: 147–164.

9. Moller S . An extension of the continual reassessment methods using a preliminary up-and-down design in a dose finding study in cancer patients, in order to investigate a greater range of doses. Stat Med 1995; 14: 911–922.

10.

10. Piantadosi S , Fisher JD , Grossman S . Practical implementation of a modified continual reassessment method for dose-finding trials. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1998; 41: 429–436.

11.

11. Heyd JM , Carlin BP . Adaptive design improvements in the continual reassessment method for Phase I studies. Stat Med 1999; 18: 1307–1121.

12.

12. Ishizuka N , Ohashi Y . The continual reassessment method and its applications: a Bayesian methodology for Phase I cancer clinical trials. Stat Med 2001; 20: 2661–2281.

13.

13. Zohar S , Chevret S . Phase I (or Phase II ) dose-ranging clinical trials: proposal of a two-stage Bayesian design. J Biopharma Stat 2003; 13: 87–101.

14.

14. Piantadosi S , Liu G . Improved designs for Phase I studies using pharmacokinetic measurements. Stat Med 1996; 15: 1605–1118.

15.

15. Gooley T , Martin P , Fisher L , Pettinger M .Simulation as a design tool for Phase I/II clinical trials: an example from bone marrow transplantation. Cont Clin Trials 1994; 15: 450–462.

16.

16. Braun T . The bivariate continual reassessment method: extending the CRM to Phase I trials of two competing outcomes. Cont Clin Trials 2002; 23: 240–256.

17.

17. Cheung Y , Chappell R . A simple technique to evaluate model sensitivity in the continual reassessment method. Biometrics 2002; 58: 671–674.

18.

18. Shen L , O'Quigley JO . Consistency of continual reassessment method under model misspecification. Biometrika 1996; 83: 395–405.

19.

19. Chevret S . The continual reassessment method in cancer Phase 1 clinical trials: a simulation study. Stat Med 1993; 12: 1093–1108.

20.

20. Mathew P , Thall P , Jones D et al. Platelet-derived growth factor receptor inhibitor imatinib mesylate and docetaxel: a modular phase I trial in androgen-independent prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 3323–3329.

21.

21. Thall P , Lee S-J . Practical model-based dose-finding in phase I clinical trials: Methods based on toxicity. Int J Gynecolog Cancer 2003; 13: 251–261.

22.

22. Zohar S , Chevret S . The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies. Stat Med 2001; 20: 2827–2243.

23.

23. O'Quigley JO , Reiner E . A stopping rule for the continual reassessment method. Biometrika 1998; 85: 741–748.