Abstract

Background:Dose-finding trials are essential to drug development as they establish recommended doses for later-phase testing. We aim to motivate wider use of model-based designs for dose finding, such as the continual reassessment method (CRM).Methods:We carried out a literature review of dose-finding designs and conducted a survey to identify perceived barriers to their implementation.Results:We describe the benefits of model-based designs (flexibility, superior operating characteristics, extended scope), their current uptake, and existing resources. The most prominent barriers to implementation of a model-based design were lack of suitable training, chief investigators’ preference for algorithm-based designs (e.g., 3+3), and limited resources for study design before funding. We use a real-world example to illustrate how these barriers can be overcome.Conclusions:There is overwhelming evidence for the benefits of CRM. Many leading pharmaceutical companies routinely implement model-based designs. Our analysis identified barriers for academic statisticians and clinical academics in mirroring the progress industry has made in trial design. Unified support from funders, regulators, and journal editors could result in more accurate doses for later-phase testing, and increase the efficiency and success of clinical drug development. We give recommendations for increasing the uptake of model-based designs for dose-finding trials in academia.

Highlights

  • Dose-finding trials are essential to drug development as they establish recommended doses for later-phase testing

  • Our analysis identified barriers for academic statisticians and clinical academics in mirroring the progress industry has made in trial design

  • Unified support from funders, regulators, and journal editors could result in more accurate doses for later-phase testing, and increase the efficiency and success of clinical drug development

Read more

Summary

Methods

We carried out a literature review of dose-finding designs and conducted a survey to identify perceived barriers to their implementation. We conducted a literature review, searching PubMed on 13 May 2015 and Embase on 8 June 2015 for ‘3 þ 3’, ‘CRM’, and general terms. Supplementary Tables A and B show our search strategies. We identified four themes in studies examining uptake of adaptive designs and Bayesian methods (Chevret, 2012; Jaki, 2013; Morgan et al, 2014; Dimairo et al, 2015a): resources, knowledge, training, and implementation. We developed survey questions (Supplementary Table C) to identify barriers within these themes. We included one question for statisticians on software and another for other respondents on statistical support

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.