TEAMS: Toxicity- and Efficacy-based Dose Insertion Design with Adaptive Model Selection for Phase I/II Dose-Escalation Trials in Oncology

A Bayesian phase I-II clinical trial design to find the biological optimal dose on drug combination

In recent years, combined therapy shows expected treatment effect as they increase dose intensity, work on multiple targets and benefit more patients for antitumor treatment. However, dose -finding designs for combined therapy face a number of challenges. Therefore, under the framework of phase I-II, we propose a two-stage dose -finding design to identify the biologically optimal dose combination (BODC), defined as the one with the maximum posterior mean utility under acceptable safety. We model the probabilities of toxicity and efficacy by using linear logistic regression models and conduct Bayesian model selection (BMS) procedure to define the most likely pattern of dose-response surface. The BMS can adaptively select the most suitable model during the trial, making the results robust. We investigated the operating characteristics of the proposed design through simulation studies under various practical scenarios and showed that the proposed design is robust and performed well.

A Bayesian design for finding optimal biological dose with mixed types of responses of toxicity and efficacy

For molecularly targeted therapy and immunotherapy, the targeted dose in the early phase clinical trial has been shifted from the maximum tolerated dose for the cytotoxic drug to the optimal biological dose where both toxicity and efficacy are considered. In this paper, we consider the situation that the responses of toxicity and efficacy are mixed in binary and continuous types, respectively, where the continuous endpoint bears more magnitude information than the binary endpoint after dichotomization. We propose combining two model-based designs to sequentially identify the most efficacious and tolerably safe dose. The employed designs both take the dose level information into account to achieve high estimation efficiency. We demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method to some existing methods by simulation.

A semi-mechanistic dose-finding design in oncology using pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling

While a number of phase I dose-finding designs in oncology exist, the commonly used ones are either algorithmic or empirical model-based. We propose a new framework for modeling the dose-response relationship, by systematically incorporating the pharmacokinetic (PK) data collected in the trial and the hypothesized mechanisms of the drug effects, via dynamic PK/PD modeling, as well as modeling of the relationship between a latent cumulative pharmacologic effect and a binary toxicity outcome. This modeling framework naturally incorporates the information on the impact of dose, schedule and method of administration (e.g., drug formulation and route of administration) on toxicity. The resulting design is an extension of existing designs that make use of pre-specified summary PK information (such as the area under the concentration-time curve [AUC] or maximum serum concentration [Cmax ]). Our simulation studies show, with moderate departure from the hypothesized mechanisms of the drug action, that the performance of the proposed design on average improves upon those of the common designs, including the continual reassessment method (CRM), Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design, modified toxicity probability interval (mTPI) method, and a design called PKLOGIT that models the effect of the AUC on toxicity. In case of considerable departure from the underlying drug effect mechanism, the performance of the design is shown to be comparable with that of the other designs. We illustrate the proposed design by applying it to the setting of a phase I trial of a γ-secretase inhibitor in metastatic or locally advanced solid tumors. We also provide R code to implement the proposed design.

Probability intervals of toxicity and efficacy design for dose-finding clinical trials in oncology

Immunotherapy, gene therapy or adoptive cell therapies, such as the chimeric antigen receptor+ T-cell therapies, have demonstrated promising therapeutic effects in oncology patients. We consider statistical designs for dose-finding adoptive cell therapy trials, in which the monotonic dose-response relationship assumed in traditional oncology trials may not hold. Building upon a previous design called "TEPI", we propose a new dose finding method - Probability Intervals of Toxicity and Efficacy (PRINTE), which utilizes toxicity and efficacy jointly in making dosing decisions, does not require a pre-elicited decision table and at the same time can handle Ockham's razor properly in the statistical inference. We show that optimizing the joint posterior expected utility of toxicity and efficacy under a 0-1 loss is equivalent to maximizing the marginal model posterior probability in the two-dimensional probability space. An extensive simulation study under various scenarios are conducted and results show that PRINTE outperforms existing designs in the literature since it assigns more patients to optimal doses and less to toxic ones, and selects optimal doses with higher percentages. The simple and transparent features together with good operating characteristics make PRINTE an improved design for dose-finding trials in oncology trials.

2D (2 Dimensional) TEQR design for Determining the optimal Dose for safety and efficacy

Designs, such as the Eff-Tox, OBD (optimal biological dose), STEIN (simple efficacy toxicity interval), and TEPI (toxicity efficacy probability interval) designs, have been proposed to determine the optimal dose of a new oncology drug using both efficacy and toxicity. The goal of these designs is to select the optimal drug dose for further phase trials more accurately than dose finding designs that only consider toxicity, such as the 3 + 3, TEQR (toxicity equivalence range), mTPI (modified toxicity probability interval), and EWOC (escalation with overdose control) designs. We propose a new frequentist design for optimal dose selection, the 2D TEQR design, that is easier to understand and simpler to implement than the TEPI, Eff-Tox, STEIN and OBD designs, as it is based on the empirical or observed toxicity and efficacy rates and does not require specialized computations. We compare the performance of this new design with those of the TEPI, STEIN, Eff-Tox and OBD Isotonic designs. Although for the same sample size and cohort size, the frequentist 2D TEQR design is less accurate than the Bayesian TEPI design and also the STEIN design in selecting the optimal dose, the accuracy of optimal dose selection of the 2D TEQR design can be increased, in many cases, with a moderate increase in cohort size. The 2D TEQR design is as accurate as or more accurate than the Eff-Tox design in optimal dose selection, and better than the OBD Isotonic design, unless there is a clear peak in the true response rates, in which case the OBD Isotonic design performs better than the other designs.

AAA: triple adaptive Bayesian designs for the identification of optimal dose combinations in dual-agent dose finding trials

We propose a flexible design for the identification of optimal dose combinations in dual-agent dose finding clinical trials. The design is called AAA, standing for three adaptations: adaptive model selection, adaptive dose insertion and adaptive cohort division. The adaptations highlight the need and opportunity for innovation for dual-agent dose finding and are supported by the numerical results presented in the proposed simulation studies. To our knowledge, this is the first design that allows for all three adaptations at the same time. We find that AAA enhances the chance of finding the optimal dose combinations and shortens the trial duration. A clinical trial is being planned to apply the AAA design and a Web tool is being developed for both statisticians and non-statisticians.

Bayesian Adaptive Design for Finding the Maximum Tolerated Sequence of Doses in Multicycle Dose-Finding Clinical Trials

Purpose

Statistical designs for traditional phase I dose-finding trials consider dose-limiting toxicity in the first cycle of treatment. In reality, patients often go through multiple cycles of treatment and may experience toxicity events in more than one cycle. Therefore, it is desirable to identify the maximum tolerated sequence of three doses across three cycles of treatment.

Methods

Motivated by a three-cycle dose-finding clinical trial for a rare cancer with a JAK inhibitor, we proposed and implemented a simple Bayesian adaptive dose-cycle finding (BaSyc) design that allows intercycle and intrapatient dose modification. Because of the patient-specific dosing strategy over cycles, the BaSyc design is suited as a method in precision oncology.

Results

BaSyc is simple and transparent because its algorithm can be summarized as two tabulated decision rules before the trial starts, allowing physicians to visually examine these rules. In addition, BaSyc employs a time-saving enrollment scheme that speeds up the trial. Extensive simulation studies show that BaSyc has desirable operating characteristics in identifying the maximum tolerated sequence.

Conclusion

The BaSyc design provides a first-of-kind multicycle approach for dose finding and will likely lead to better and safer patient care and drug development.

Toxicity and Efficacy Probability Interval Design for Phase I Adoptive Cell Therapy Dose-Finding Clinical Trials

Recent trials of adoptive cell therapy (ACT), such as the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, have demonstrated promising therapeutic effects for cancer patients. A main issue in the product development is to determine the appropriate dose of ACT. Traditional phase I trial designs for cytotoxic agents explicitly assume that toxicity increases monotonically with dose levels and implicitly assume the same for efficacy to justify dose escalation. ACT usually induces rapid responses, and the monotonic dose-response assumption is unlikely to hold due to its immunobiologic activities. We propose a toxicity and efficacy probability interval (TEPI) design for dose finding in ACT trials. This approach incorporates efficacy outcomes to inform dosing decisions to optimize efficacy and safety simultaneously. Rather than finding the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), the TEPI design is aimed at finding the dose with the most desirable outcome for safety and efficacy. The key features of TEPI are its simplicity, flexibility, and transparency, because all decision rules can be prespecified prior to trial initiation. We conduct simulation studies to investigate the operating characteristics of the TEPI design and compare it to existing methods. In summary, the TEPI design is a novel method for ACT dose finding, which possesses superior performance and is easy to use, simple, and transparent. Clin Cancer Res; 23(1); 13-20. ©2016 AACR.