跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:分位数估计用于临床剂量探索,摘要未涉及经济分布效应或所列其他计量细分。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Y. K. Cheung
M. S. V. Elkind

利用虚拟观测在离散剂量水平上进行随机逼近寻量

研究问题
当一期临床试验只能使用离散剂量时,如何利用连续生物标志物信息寻找达到目标毒性概率的剂量水平?
方法与思路
作者将剂量分位数问题转化为连续变量均值的求根问题,并在连续剂量范围定义虚拟观测,以改造随机逼近算法。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称方法继承随机逼近的收敛性质与计算简便性;基于真实试验数据的模拟显示精度改善及对模型误设的稳健性。
阅读关注点
应核对连续指标与毒性目标的对应关系、虚拟观测构造、离散剂量更新规则,以及模拟中比较方法与误设情景的设置。
阅读边界
材料为 OpenAlex 索引摘要,稿件版本未注明;收敛条件和模拟数值未说明,所述精度改善不能推广到所有试验设计。

原文摘要

Phase I clinical studies are experiments in which a new drug is administered to humans to determine the maximum dose that causes toxicity with a target probability. Phase I dose-finding is often formulated as a quantile estimation problem. For studies with a biological endpoint, it is common to define toxicity by dichotomizing the continuous biomarker expression. In this article, we propose a novel variant of the Robbins-Monro stochastic approximation that utilizes the continuous measurements for quantile estimation. The Robbins-Monro method has seldom seen clinical applications, because it does not perform well for quantile estimation with binary data and it works with a continuum of doses that are generally not available in practice. To address these issues, we formulate the dose-finding problem as root-finding for the mean of a continuous variable, for which the stochastic approximation procedure is efficient. To accommodate the use of discrete doses, we introduce the idea of virtual observation that is defined on a continuous dosage range. Our proposed method inherits the convergence properties of the stochastic approximation algorithm and its computational simplicity. Simulations based on real trial data show that our proposed method improves accuracy compared with the continual re-assessment method and produces results robust to model misspecification.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文