It is increasingly common for therapies in oncology to be given in combination. In some cases, patients can benefit from the interaction between two drugs, although often at the risk of higher toxicity. A large number of designs to conduct phase I trials in this setting are available, where the objective is to select the maximum tolerated dose combination (MTC). Recently, a number of model-free (also called model-assisted) designs have provoked interest, providing several practical advantages over the more conventional approaches of rule-based or model-based designs. In this paper, we demonstrate a novel calibration procedure for model-free designs to determine their most desirable parameters. Under the calibration procedure, we compare the behaviour of model-free designs to a model-based approach in a comprehensive simulation study, covering a number of clinically plausible scenarios. It is found that model-free designs are competitive with the model-based design in terms of the proportion of correct selections of the MTC. However, there are a number of scenarios in which model-free designs offer a safer alternative. This is also illustrated in the application of the designs to a case study using data from a phase I oncology trial.
翻译:肿瘤治疗的结合越来越常见,在某些情况下,病人可以受益于两种药物之间的相互作用,尽管这种相互作用往往有较高的毒性风险。在这种环境下,有大量设计可以进行第一阶段试验,目的是选择最大容许剂量组合(MTC)。最近,一些无模型(也称为模型辅助)的设计引起了人们的兴趣,为较传统的基于规则的设计或基于模型的设计设计提供了一些实际优势。在本文中,我们展示了一种新的无模型设计校准程序,以确定其最理想的参数。在校准程序下,我们将无模型设计的行为与基于模型的方法相比较,在综合模拟研究中涵盖一些临床上可信的假设情况,发现无模型设计与基于模型的设计相比,在正确选择MTC的比例方面是竞争性的。然而,在一些假设中,无模型设计提供了一种更安全的替代方法。在将设计应用于案例研究时,利用第一阶段的肿瘤试验数据,也说明了这一点。