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:摘要研究临床试验的贝叶斯剂量决策,未明确涉及所列计量领域的因果识别或结构估计。

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
Juhee Lee
Peter F. Thall
Yuan Ji
Peter Müller

基于疗效与毒性联合效用的两周期贝叶斯剂量探索

研究问题
在两周期治疗中,如何结合疗效与毒性,为每位患者动态选择剂量或停止治疗,并利用患者自身及其他患者的信息更新决策?
方法与思路
作者提出一期/二期临床试验设计,以贝叶斯层级潜变量关联二元结局,根据联合结局效用定义的目标函数后验选择各周期行动。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称该设计同时在患者内与患者间自适应,第二周期决策依赖首周期剂量和结局;提供与多种两周期设计的模拟比较及稳健性评估。
阅读关注点
应核对联合效用的设定、剂量安全约束、潜变量模型和后验计算,并检查模拟比较的情景及稳健性评估是否涵盖模型误设。
阅读边界
材料为稿件版本未注明的 OpenAlex 索引摘要,未提供模拟数值或比较结论;提出自适应设计不能直接证明其临床优越性。

原文摘要

Juhee Lee, Peter F. Thall, Yuan Ji & Peter MüllerJuhee Lee, Department of Statistics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 (E-mail: ).Peter F. Thall, Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77230-1402 (E-mail: ).Yuan Ji, Center for Clinical and Research Informatics, North Shore University Health System, Evanston, IL 60201 (E-mail: ).Peter Müller, Department of Mathematics, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 (E-mail: ).Yuan Ji’s research is supported by NIH R01/NCI CA132897. Peter Thall’s research was supported by NIH/NCI R01 CA 83932 and NIH/NCI 5 P50 CA140388. Peter Müller’s research was supported by NIH/NCI R01 CA157458-01A1.This article proposes a phase I/II clinical trial design for adaptively and dynamically optimizing each patient’s dose in each of two cycles of therapy based on the joint binary efficacy and toxicity outcomes in each cycle. A dose-outcome model is assumed that includes a Bayesian hierarchical latent variable structure to induce association among the outcomes and also facilitate posterior computation. Doses are chosen in each cycle based on posteriors of a model-based objective function, similar to a reinforcement learning or Q-learning function, defined in terms of numerical utilities of the joint outcomes in each cycle. For each patient, the procedure outputs a sequence of two actions, one for each cycle, with each action being the decision to either treat the patient at a chosen dose or not to treat. The cycle 2 action depends on the individual patient’s cycle 1 dose and outcomes. In addition, decisions are based on posterior inference using other patients’ data, and therefore, the proposed method is adaptive both within and between patients. A simulation study of the method is presented, including comparison to two-cycle extensions of the conventional 3 + 3 algorithm, continual reassessment method, and a Bayesian model-based design, and evaluation of robustness. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文