This document discusses Bayesian methods for designing phase I clinical trials testing drug combinations in oncology. It describes the challenges of such trials and requirements for an optimal design. A Bayesian model is proposed that estimates the dose-toxicity relationship and interaction between drugs. It allows for flexible cohorts and real-time incorporation of additional data to guide dose escalation decisions. Historical and preclinical data can be used to inform priors in the model, improving dose targeting while maintaining patient safety.
Learning machine learning with YellowbrickRebecca Bilbro
Yellowbrick is an open source Python library that provides visual diagnostic tools called “Visualizers” that extend the Scikit-Learn API to allow human steering of the model selection process. For teachers and students of machine learning, Yellowbrick can be used as a framework for teaching and understanding a large variety of algorithms and methods.
SGS Biopharm Day 2016 - Modeling & simulation in Phase 1Ruben Faelens
This slidedeck shows how Model-Informed Drug Development can be applied in a Phase 1 first-in-human trial, informing starting dose, dose escalation as well as stop dose.
Legato-HD Phase 2: A Clinical Trial Updatevisualscience
Legato-HD is a clinical trial which aims to test the use of the experimental drug Laquinimod in treating Huntington's Disease. Here we illustrate the progress the trial is making as it enters Phase 2.
Learning machine learning with YellowbrickRebecca Bilbro
Yellowbrick is an open source Python library that provides visual diagnostic tools called “Visualizers” that extend the Scikit-Learn API to allow human steering of the model selection process. For teachers and students of machine learning, Yellowbrick can be used as a framework for teaching and understanding a large variety of algorithms and methods.
SGS Biopharm Day 2016 - Modeling & simulation in Phase 1Ruben Faelens
This slidedeck shows how Model-Informed Drug Development can be applied in a Phase 1 first-in-human trial, informing starting dose, dose escalation as well as stop dose.
Legato-HD Phase 2: A Clinical Trial Updatevisualscience
Legato-HD is a clinical trial which aims to test the use of the experimental drug Laquinimod in treating Huntington's Disease. Here we illustrate the progress the trial is making as it enters Phase 2.
When a new drug/device/surgical procedure/treatment or other potential medical innovation is developed it must be thoroughly tested to ensure that it is safe and does what it is supposed to be.
This presentation will provide a basic overview of clinical research process.
Freshers in clinical research and regulatory affairs must go through this presentation. It will help you to understand the basis of clinical trial design as per European guidelines, which is the most preferred reference guideline. Initially, I also faced many problems to understand this concept. A student who is studying a clinical research diploma can also use this presentation for their basic understanding.
An overview of the ICH E9 guidance. Easy to follow, and I can provide a live presentation of this to your team! Great for those who are not familiar with statistics.
PUH 5302, Applied Biostatistics 1
Course Learning Outcomes for Unit III
Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
4. Recommend solutions to public health problems using biostatistical methods.
4.1 Compute and interpret probability for biostatistical analysis.
4.2 Draw conclusions about public health problems based on biostatistical methods.
5. Analyze public health information to interpret results of biostatistical analysis.
5.1 Analyze literature related to biostatistical analysis in the public health field.
5.2 Prepare an annotated bibliography that explores a topic related to public health issues.
Course/Unit
Learning Outcomes
Learning Activity
4.1
Unit Lesson
Chapter 5
Unit III Problem Solving
4.2
Unit Lesson
Chapter 5
Unit III Problem Solving
5.1
Chapter 5
Unit III Annotated Bibliography
5.2
Chapter 5
Unit III Annotated Bibliography
Reading Assignment
Chapter 5: The Role of Probability
Unit Lesson
Welcome to Unit III. In previous units, we discussed some fundamentals of biostatistics and their application
to solving public health problems. In Unit III, we will compute, interpret, and apply probability, especially in
relation to different populations.
Computing and Interpreting Probabilities
Probability means using a number (or numbers) to demonstrate how likely something is to occur. For
example, if a coin is tossed, the probability of getting a heads or tail is one out of two chances; that is ½.
Researchers have used probability studies to predict weather and other events and have been successful to
some extent. Public health professionals have used statistical methods to predict the chances of health-
related events, thereby providing arguments in favor of taking precautionary measures and warning the
general public on important health issues.
In biostatistics, we use both descriptive statistics and inferential statistics to address public health issues
within a population. In most cases, researchers are not able to study the entire population; they try to get a
sample from the population from which they can generalize their findings.
Descriptive Statistics
Aside from the use of probability sampling methods, there are other methods used for the computation and
interpretation of data; these are generally known as descriptive statistics. With descriptive statistics, we
UNIT III STUDY GUIDE
Probability
PUH 5302, Applied Biostatistics 2
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
normally compute the mean, mode, median, variance, and standard deviation. Information obtained using
such computation methods is used for descriptive purposes, as opposed to information obtained from
inferential statistics.
Let’s examine this example using the numbers 5, 10, 2, 4, 6, 10, 2, 3, and 2.
The mean is the sum of all the numbers ÷ the number of cases
= 37 ÷ 9
= 4.11
The median is the middle number after the numbers have been arranged in an ascending or descend ...
This presentation was made at the PAMM winter meeting in Verona (Italy) February 2019 and intended students to go through the basic methods used for phase I clinical trials.
Navigating the Metaverse: A Journey into Virtual Evolution"Donna Lenk
Join us for an exploration of the Metaverse's evolution, where innovation meets imagination. Discover new dimensions of virtual events, engage with thought-provoking discussions, and witness the transformative power of digital realms."
Gamify Your Mind; The Secret Sauce to Delivering Success, Continuously Improv...Shahin Sheidaei
Games are powerful teaching tools, fostering hands-on engagement and fun. But they require careful consideration to succeed. Join me to explore factors in running and selecting games, ensuring they serve as effective teaching tools. Learn to maintain focus on learning objectives while playing, and how to measure the ROI of gaming in education. Discover strategies for pitching gaming to leadership. This session offers insights, tips, and examples for coaches, team leads, and enterprise leaders seeking to teach from simple to complex concepts.
Accelerate Enterprise Software Engineering with PlatformlessWSO2
Key takeaways:
Challenges of building platforms and the benefits of platformless.
Key principles of platformless, including API-first, cloud-native middleware, platform engineering, and developer experience.
How Choreo enables the platformless experience.
How key concepts like application architecture, domain-driven design, zero trust, and cell-based architecture are inherently a part of Choreo.
Demo of an end-to-end app built and deployed on Choreo.
Listen to the keynote address and hear about the latest developments from Rachana Ananthakrishnan and Ian Foster who review the updates to the Globus Platform and Service, and the relevance of Globus to the scientific community as an automation platform to accelerate scientific discovery.
A Comprehensive Look at Generative AI in Retail App Testing.pdfkalichargn70th171
Traditional software testing methods are being challenged in retail, where customer expectations and technological advancements continually shape the landscape. Enter generative AI—a transformative subset of artificial intelligence technologies poised to revolutionize software testing.
First Steps with Globus Compute Multi-User EndpointsGlobus
In this presentation we will share our experiences around getting started with the Globus Compute multi-user endpoint. Working with the Pharmacology group at the University of Auckland, we have previously written an application using Globus Compute that can offload computationally expensive steps in the researcher's workflows, which they wish to manage from their familiar Windows environments, onto the NeSI (New Zealand eScience Infrastructure) cluster. Some of the challenges we have encountered were that each researcher had to set up and manage their own single-user globus compute endpoint and that the workloads had varying resource requirements (CPUs, memory and wall time) between different runs. We hope that the multi-user endpoint will help to address these challenges and share an update on our progress here.
We describe the deployment and use of Globus Compute for remote computation. This content is aimed at researchers who wish to compute on remote resources using a unified programming interface, as well as system administrators who will deploy and operate Globus Compute services on their research computing infrastructure.
Globus Compute wth IRI Workflows - GlobusWorld 2024Globus
As part of the DOE Integrated Research Infrastructure (IRI) program, NERSC at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and ALCF at Argonne National Lab are working closely with General Atomics on accelerating the computing requirements of the DIII-D experiment. As part of the work the team is investigating ways to speedup the time to solution for many different parts of the DIII-D workflow including how they run jobs on HPC systems. One of these routes is looking at Globus Compute as a way to replace the current method for managing tasks and we describe a brief proof of concept showing how Globus Compute could help to schedule jobs and be a tool to connect compute at different facilities.
Unleash Unlimited Potential with One-Time Purchase
BoxLang is more than just a language; it's a community. By choosing a Visionary License, you're not just investing in your success, you're actively contributing to the ongoing development and support of BoxLang.
Enhancing Research Orchestration Capabilities at ORNL.pdfGlobus
Cross-facility research orchestration comes with ever-changing constraints regarding the availability and suitability of various compute and data resources. In short, a flexible data and processing fabric is needed to enable the dynamic redirection of data and compute tasks throughout the lifecycle of an experiment. In this talk, we illustrate how we easily leveraged Globus services to instrument the ACE research testbed at the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility with flexible data and task orchestration capabilities.
TROUBLESHOOTING 9 TYPES OF OUTOFMEMORYERRORTier1 app
Even though at surface level ‘java.lang.OutOfMemoryError’ appears as one single error; underlyingly there are 9 types of OutOfMemoryError. Each type of OutOfMemoryError has different causes, diagnosis approaches and solutions. This session equips you with the knowledge, tools, and techniques needed to troubleshoot and conquer OutOfMemoryError in all its forms, ensuring smoother, more efficient Java applications.
Large Language Models and the End of ProgrammingMatt Welsh
Talk by Matt Welsh at Craft Conference 2024 on the impact that Large Language Models will have on the future of software development. In this talk, I discuss the ways in which LLMs will impact the software industry, from replacing human software developers with AI, to replacing conventional software with models that perform reasoning, computation, and problem-solving.
In software engineering, the right architecture is essential for robust, scalable platforms. Wix has undergone a pivotal shift from event sourcing to a CRUD-based model for its microservices. This talk will chart the course of this pivotal journey.
Event sourcing, which records state changes as immutable events, provided robust auditing and "time travel" debugging for Wix Stores' microservices. Despite its benefits, the complexity it introduced in state management slowed development. Wix responded by adopting a simpler, unified CRUD model. This talk will explore the challenges of event sourcing and the advantages of Wix's new "CRUD on steroids" approach, which streamlines API integration and domain event management while preserving data integrity and system resilience.
Participants will gain valuable insights into Wix's strategies for ensuring atomicity in database updates and event production, as well as caching, materialization, and performance optimization techniques within a distributed system.
Join us to discover how Wix has mastered the art of balancing simplicity and extensibility, and learn how the re-adoption of the modest CRUD has turbocharged their development velocity, resilience, and scalability in a high-growth environment.
Exploring Innovations in Data Repository Solutions - Insights from the U.S. G...Globus
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has made substantial investments in meeting evolving scientific, technical, and policy driven demands on storing, managing, and delivering data. As these demands continue to grow in complexity and scale, the USGS must continue to explore innovative solutions to improve its management, curation, sharing, delivering, and preservation approaches for large-scale research data. Supporting these needs, the USGS has partnered with the University of Chicago-Globus to research and develop advanced repository components and workflows leveraging its current investment in Globus. The primary outcome of this partnership includes the development of a prototype enterprise repository, driven by USGS Data Release requirements, through exploration and implementation of the entire suite of the Globus platform offerings, including Globus Flow, Globus Auth, Globus Transfer, and Globus Search. This presentation will provide insights into this research partnership, introduce the unique requirements and challenges being addressed and provide relevant project progress.
Into the Box Keynote Day 2: Unveiling amazing updates and announcements for modern CFML developers! Get ready for exciting releases and updates on Ortus tools and products. Stay tuned for cutting-edge innovations designed to boost your productivity.
Innovating Inference - Remote Triggering of Large Language Models on HPC Clus...Globus
Large Language Models (LLMs) are currently the center of attention in the tech world, particularly for their potential to advance research. In this presentation, we'll explore a straightforward and effective method for quickly initiating inference runs on supercomputers using the vLLM tool with Globus Compute, specifically on the Polaris system at ALCF. We'll begin by briefly discussing the popularity and applications of LLMs in various fields. Following this, we will introduce the vLLM tool, and explain how it integrates with Globus Compute to efficiently manage LLM operations on Polaris. Attendees will learn the practical aspects of setting up and remotely triggering LLMs from local machines, focusing on ease of use and efficiency. This talk is ideal for researchers and practitioners looking to leverage the power of LLMs in their work, offering a clear guide to harnessing supercomputing resources for quick and effective LLM inference.
Globus Connect Server Deep Dive - GlobusWorld 2024Globus
We explore the Globus Connect Server (GCS) architecture and experiment with advanced configuration options and use cases. This content is targeted at system administrators who are familiar with GCS and currently operate—or are planning to operate—broader deployments at their institution.
Globus Connect Server Deep Dive - GlobusWorld 2024
A Bayesian Industry Approach to Phase 1 Combination Trials in Oncology
1. Satrajit Roychoudhury
East User Group Meeting 2014
Oct 22nd 2014
A Bayesian Industry Approach to
Phase I Combination Trials
in Oncology
2. Beat Neuenschwander
Alessandro Matano
Zhongwen Tang
Simon Wandel
Stuart Bailey
Statistical Methods in Drug
Combination Studies, Boca
Raton, FL: Chapman &
Hall/CRC Press (2015)
Book Chapter and Authors
Acknowledgements
2 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
3. Table of Content
1. Introduction
2. Phase I Design Framework
3. Methodology
4. Applications
5. Implementation Issues
6. Conclusion
3 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
4. 1. Introduction
In Oncology, challenges in Phase I trials are many: while
keeping patient safety within acceptable limits, the trials
should be small, adaptive, and enable a quick declaration
of the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) and/or
recommended phase II dose (RP2D).
The objective of this chapter is to provide a
comprehensive overview, which includes;
• a rationale based on general clinical and statistical considerations,
• a summary of the methodological components, and
• applications
4 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
5. 1. Introduction
Challenges and Design Requirements
Phase I Trial Challenges Design Requirements
Untested drug or combination in
treatment-resistant patients
Escalating dose cohorts with small
number of patients (e.g. 3-6)
Primary objective: determine
Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD)
Accurately estimate MTD
High toxicity potential: safety first Robustly avoid toxic doses
(“overdosing”)
Most responses occur 80%-120% of
MTD
Avoid sub therapeutic doses while
controlling overdosing
Find best dose for dose expansion
(which generally becomes the
recommended phase II dose)
Enroll more patients at acceptable, active
doses (flexible cohort sizes)
Complete trial in timely fashion Use available information efficiently
5 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
6. 2. Phase I design framework
Traditional 3+3 design
Trial Data
0/3,0/3,1/3,...
Dose escalation
decision from
predefined
algorithm
Very simple BUT
• Poor targeting of true MTD
• Highly variable estimates
High attrition rates in phase II and III
• How many failures are due to the wrong dose coming
from phase I?
6 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
7. 2. Phase I design framework
Why Bayesian modeling?
Bayesian approach offers a way to quantify our
knowledge and assess risk.
• Given what I have seen, what can I say about the true risk of dose
limiting toxicity (DLT)?
Models allow us to share information between doses –
efficient use of data.
Flexibility to include additional patients, unplanned doses,
change schedules.
Higher chance to find the correct MTD (Rogatko et al.
(2007)).
7 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
8. 2. Phase I design framework
Clinically driven, statistically supported decisions
DLT rates
p1, p2,...,pMTD,...
(uncertainty!)
Historical
Data
(prior info)
Model based
dose-DLT
relationship
Trial Data
0/3,0/3,1/3,...
Clinical
Expertise
Dose
recommen-
dations
Decisions
Dose Escalation
Decision
Model Inference Decision/Policy
Responsible: Statistician Responsible: Investigators/Clinician
Informing: Clinician (Prior, DLT) Informing: Statistician (risk)
8 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
9. 3. Methodology
Single Agent Model (Neuenschwander et. al. 2008)
Data: (#DLT/#Patients): 𝑟𝑑~ Binomial(π 𝑑, 𝑛 𝑑)
Parameter Model: logit 𝜋 𝑑 = log(α) + β log(d/d*)
Prior: (log(α), log(β)) ~ N2(m1, m2, s1, s2, corr)
Model parameter α and β can be interpreted as;
α is the odds, of a DLT at d*, an arbitrary scaling dose.
β > 0 is the increase in the log-odds of a DLT by a unit
increase in log-dose.
Can be extended by adding additional covariates/relevant
predictors representing different patient-strata.
9 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
10. 3. Methodology
Developing drug combinations: Paradigm change from single agent
There is no longer one MTD but a many
- e.g. given drug A = X mg, MTD of drug B is Y mg.
- Critical to determine the MTD boundary and the set of acceptable
doses.
Still in “learning phase”
- Flexibility (e.g., variable cohort sizes, split cohorts).
- Bayesian model summarizes knowledge on all dose pairs, sets
upper bound on dosing.
- Actual decisions use additional information (e.g. efficacy, PK,
biomarkers, later cycle AE) to select “best” dose pair(s) for next
cohort.
10 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
11. 3. Methodology
Interaction: Antagonism, independence or synergy
There are a number of factors that may lead to increased or
decreased risk of toxicity;
• Drug-Drug Interaction seen in the PK profiles, e.g.
- AUC or Cmax for one or both compounds is significantly
increased/decreased compared to being given alone.
- May be competitively using/inhibiting CYP enzyme causing lower clearance.
• Overlapping toxicities, e.g.
- If drug 1 and drug 2 have similar toxicity profiles, giving them together may
cause a significant increase in the observed rate.
- Equally, the combination may cause the same toxicity in the same subset of
patients but at a higher grade, whilst other patients are unaffected.
- Two toxicities that, when they occur together increase the risk of DLT in a
patient.
• Pathway interactions, feedback loops that either trigger additional
toxicities or provide protective effects.
11 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
12. 3. Methodology
Dual and Triple Combination Model
Proposed model has two parts: (multiplicative odds model)
• Marginal effects: 2 parameters per agent representing single agent
toxicities.
• Interaction: 1 parameter for Dual interaction (Dual combo model).
: 4 parameters for Dual and triple(extra) interaction
(Triple combo model).
Extension of Thall et. al. Biometrics (2003).
Properties for proposed combination models
• Parsimonious since the number of tested dose combinations in
phase I trials is usually fairly small.
• Have easily interpretable parameters similar to Base model.
• Allow for interaction.
• Have the ability to incorporate single-agent information.
12 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
13. 3. Methodology
Metrics for Dosing Recommendations
Posterior Distribution: The result of the Bayesian
analysis is the posterior distribution of
which, in turn , leads to the posterior of for each dose
group. Our approach relies formally on this metric (using
principle of escalation with overdose control (EWOC)) for
suggesting feasible dose for next cohort.
Predictive Distribution: The predictive distribution of the
number of DLT “r*” in the next cohort with size “n”. This
metric is used informally in discussions with clinical teams.
A Formal Decision Analysis: We do not use formal
decision analysis to identify the dose range for further
dosing or the MTD/RP2D.
13 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
14. 3. Methodology
Choice of Prior: Using Contextual Information or Co-data
Key question: Can we use available information as prior?
Naive views
• The information is of no value because we simply don‘t know what‘s
going to happen in our trial
• Or, transform these data into a prior that is worth N patients
• Eg. N=200, with observed rate = 0.10. Use a Beta(20,180) prior.
Between-trial heterogeneity discounting historical data
• After discounting, prior may be Beta(2,18)
• Don‘t use 10% as a rule of thumb for discounting!
Methodology: meta-analytic-predictive (MAP)
• Random-effects meta-analysis of historical data/parameters 1,... H
• with a prediction for the parameter * in the new trial
• basic assumption: exchangeable parameters
14 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
15. 3. Methodology
Meta-analytic-predictive (MAP) Prior
Similarity Scenario
H Historical Trials with Effects 1,..., H
Data from Historical Trials Yh h=1,...,H
Similarity of Parameters 1, ..., H, * ~ N(µ,2)
Meta-Analytic-Predictive (MAP) Prior * | Y1,..., YH
Challenge: how large is ? (cannot be inferred if for small H)
15 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
16. 3. Methodology
MAP Prior for Oncology Phase I
Different types of a-priori information in Phase I
• Animal data (2 species, e.g. dog and rat)
Requires discounting of information due to between-species
extrapolation.
• Historical data for same compound in another indication
(with similar toxicity profile), one or more trials.
Requires moderate to substantial discounting of information
due to between-trial/indication extrapolation.
Typically these priors have relatively little weight, 3 to 9 pts.
• Compared to phase I sample sizes of 15 to 30 patients,
this is still relevant information.
16 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
17. 3. Methodology
MAP Priors for Phase I Combination Studies
Prior for single-agent parameters
• Bivariate normal prior: from co-data (historical/external data), with
appropriate discounting due to between-trial variability using MAP.
Prior for interaction parameter (odds-multipliers) ’s
• Normal (no restriction) or log-normal (synergistic toxicity)
• Pre-clinical/Clinical information can be incorporated in the prior of
interaction parameter. But often no information is available.
Therefore weakly-informative priors are used.
17 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
18. 3. Methodology
Robust Mixture Prior
The use of historical data requires an extrapolation from
the past to the future. Predictions are always difficult.
What if there is a possibility that the chosen prior will be in
conflict with the actually observed data?
Possible robustification: MAP Mixture Priors
• Adding a weakly informative component to MAP may
address the issue.
• Mixture weights represent the degree of similarity
between codata and new trial.
• Mixture priors are more robust against prior-data conflict,
and should be used more often (rarely seen in practice).
18 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
19. 4. Applications
Practical consideration for Implementation
What is our starting combination?
• Generally determined ad-hoc... 50% of each MTD?
• What about interaction? Uncertainty?
No evidence of synergistic
or antagonistic interaction
between the two compounds
• But don’t want to rule it out
• Normal distribution for interaction
parameter:
- Antagonism
- Independence
- Synergy
19 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
20. 4. Applications
Dual-Combination Trial: Background
Combination of two new compounds
• Compound 1: d1 = 3, 4.5, 6, 8; d1* = 3 (all mg)
• Compound 2: d2 = 33.3, 50, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1120; d2* = 960 (all mg)
• Dose-limiting data (DLT): days 1 - 28
• Toxicity intervals for 𝜋 𝑑: [0-0.16), [0.16-0.35), [0.35-1.00]
• EWOC: P(𝜋 𝑑 >= 0.35) < 0.25
Actual dosing decisions
• must respect EWOC criterion.
• should also acknowledge other relevant information (PK, efficacy, ...).
Additional design constraints
• Cohort size 3 to 6
• Only one compound's dose can be increased; max. increment of 100%.
20 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
21. 4. Applications
Rules to determine MTD
Dose escalations continue until declaration of the
MTD.
A dose is potential candidate for MTD when;
1. At least 6 patients have been treated at this dose
2. This dose satisfies one of the following conditions:
- The probability of targeted toxicity exceeds 50%:
- or, a minimum of number of 15 patients have already been treated
in the trial.
21 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
22. 4. Applications
Dual-Combination Trial: Prior derivation
Relevant (single-agent) data was identified
MAP approach to derive priors based on this data:
discussion with clinical team about similarity
No a-priori evidence for interaction between the two
compounds, but considerable uncertainty
22 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
23. 4. Applications
Dual-Combination Trial: Full history (1/2)
23 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
25. 5. Applications
MTD Declaration
3-800: grade 2 adverse events, moderate increase in
magnitude and duration of QT.
4.5-600: experienced grade 1 and/or grade 2 adverse
events, No QT prolongation. BUT none of the patients had
a relevant tumor lesion decrease.
6-400: experienced grade 2 adverse events, but easily
managed with appropriate dose reductions, No QT
prolongation. Moreover, encouraging efficacy signals were
observed.
Based on clinical and statistical findings : 6-400 mg was
declared as the MTD and RP2D.
| East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial25
26. 4. Applications
Triple-Combination Trial: Background
Triple combination
• One «backbone», two experimental
• Agent 1: 100, 200, 300, 400 mg
• Agent 2: 10, 20, 30, 40 mg
• Agent 3: 250 mg (fixed)
Stage-wise approach considered reasonable
• Find MTD for agent 2 + 3
• Escalation of agents 1 and 2 (agent 3 fixed)
Prior derivation similar to dual combination case.
26 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
27. 4. Applications
Triple-Combination Trial: Model assessment (1/3)
Stage I: Data scenarios for Dual Combination
27 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
28. 4. Applications
Triple-Combination Trial: Model assessment (2/3)
Stage II: Data scenarios for Triple Combination
28 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
29. 4. Applications
Triple-Combination Trial: Model assessment (3/3)
Operating characteristics: Assumed true toxicity rates
Metrics
29 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
30. 5. Implementation issues
Practical guide
Some of the points that need to be considered when
implementing the proposed Bayesian adaptive design in
clinical practice.
Discussion with clinical colleagues
Expertise in Bayesian Statistics
Computations
Study Protocols
Review Boards
30 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
31. 5. Implementation issues
Discussion with clinical colleagues
Discussing important features with clinical colleagues: key
responsibilities of a statistician when designing and
implementing clinical trials.
Recommended to explain the main features of the
approach using visual illustrations, non-statistical
language, and common sense.
A good preparation includes a mimicked dose-escalation
meeting using data scenarios to highlight various possible
outcomes.
31 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
32. 5. Implementation issues
Expertise in Bayesian Statistics and Computation
Expertise in Bayesian Statistics: Implementing the
proposed approach requires:
• Technical skills related to the concrete implementation
• the ability to explain in simple language
• Training/workshop/case studies for clinician and statistician
• project-related regular interactions between statisticians and
clinicians
Computation: Require a tool that allows to extract the
relevant metrics for inference and decision making:
• WinBUGS/R
• JAGS
• Stan
32 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
33. 5. Implementation issues
Study Protocols
Requires more attention when Bayesian methods are used.
A clear description of the model and prior needs to be
provided in protocol.
If an informative prior based on external information is
used, the derivation of the prior should be clear in protocol.
The actual process for dose-escalations needs to be
described as well.
Further technical details including data scenarios and
operating characteristic may be covered in a statistical
appendix.
33 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
34. 5. Implementation Issues
Review Boards
Experience shows that discussions with HA and IRB/IEC
around these issues lead to a better understanding and
appreciation of the rationale and intent of the proposed
approach.
“Typical” questions include;
• A 25% risk of overdose is too high.
• The design allows too many patients to be exposed at once to a new
dose level.
• The design must be set up in a way that observation of 2 DLT at a
dose level means that this dose cannot be used again.
• The design makes a recommendation, but the clinician decides the
dose. This implies that a decision may overrule the original
recommendation, and patients may be dosed at unsafe dose levels.
34 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
35. 6. Conclusion
Detailed explanation of phase I (combination) approach
• Concepts
• Mathematical background
• Examples
• Practical implementation
Covers about 10 years of practical expertise
• Methodological work
• Operational experience (> 100 trials)
• Technical implementation
Standard at Novartis Oncology (others just taking up)
35 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
36. References (1/2)
[1] Neuenschwander, Matano, Tang, Roychoudhury,
Wandeland Bailey. A Bayesian Industry Approach to
Phase I Combination Trials in Oncology. Statistical
Methods in Drug Combination Studies, Boca Raton, FL:
Chapman & Hall/CRC Press 2015.
[2] Neuenschwander, Branson, Gsponer. Critical aspects of
the Bayesian approach to phase I cancer trials. StatMed
2008.
[3] Rogatko, Schoeneck, Jonas et al. Translation of
innovative designs into phase I trials. JCO 2007.
36 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial
37. References (2/2)
[4] Babb, Rogatko, Zacks. Cancer phase I clinical trials:
efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Statistics
in Medicine 1998.
[5] Thall, Lee. Practical model-based dose-finding in
phase I clinical trials: methods based on toxicity. Int J
Gynecol Cancer 2003.
[6] Thall, Millikan, Mueller, Lee. Dose-finding with two
agents in phase I oncology trials. Biometrics 2003.
[7] O’Quigley, Pepe, Fisher. Continual reassessment
method: a practical design for phase I clinical trials in
cancer. Biometrics 1990.
37 | East User Group Meeting 2014 | Satrajit Roychoudhury | Oct 22, 2014 | Phase I Combination Trial