Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by O'Quigley, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by O'Quigley, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Biostatistics 3:87-99 (2002)
© 2002 Oxford University Press

Continual reassessment designs with early termination

John O'Quigley

Department of Mathematics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla CA 92093, USA. oquigley{at}math.ucsd.edu

The continual reassessment method (CRM) is an increasingly popular approach for estimating the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in phase I dose finding studies. In its original formulation, the scheme is based on a fixed sample size. Many experimenters feel that, whenever possible, it may be advantageous to bring these trials to an early halt and thus reduce average sample size required to complete the study. To address this issue a stopping rule has been proposed (O'Quigley and Reiner, 1998) based on the idea that continuing the study would not lead to a change in recommendation with high probability. The rule, based on precise probabilistic calculation, is quite involved and not straightforward to implement. A much simpler rule can be constructed based on the idea of having settled at some level. In this work we investigate more deeply the essential ingredients behind these rules and consider more closely their operating characteristics.

Keywords: Clinical trial; Continual reassessment method; Dose finding; Early termination; Phase 1 designs; Sample size; Stopping rules


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Clin TrialsHome page
A. Iasonos, A. S Wilton, E. R Riedel, V. E Seshan, and D. R Spriggs
A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies
Clinical Trials, October 1, 2008; 5(5): 465 - 477.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Jpn J Clin OncolHome page
S. Morita, M. Toi, T. Kobayashi, Y. Ito, Y. Hozumi, S. Ohno, H. Iwata, and J. Sakamoto
Application of a Continual Reassessment Method to a Phase I Clinical Trial of Capecitabine in Combination with Cyclophosphamide and Epirubicin (CEX) for Inoperable or Recurrent Breast Cancer
Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., February 1, 2004; 34(2): 104 - 106.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.