Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2501.18930

Estimands for Early Phase Dose Optimization Trials in Oncology

Ayon Mukherjee·Jonathan L. Moscovici·Zheng Liu
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Phase I dose escalation trials in oncology generally aim to find the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). However, with the advent of molecular targeted therapies and antibody drug conjugates, dose limiting toxicities are less frequently observed, giving rise to the concept of optimal biological dose (OBD), which considers both efficacy and toxicity. The Estimand framework presented in the addendum of the ICH E9(R1) guidelines strengthens the dialogue between different stakeholders by bringing in greater clarity in the clinical trial objectives and by providing alignment between the targeted estimand under consideration and the statistical analysis methods. However, there lacks clarity in implementing this framework in early phase dose optimization studies. This manuscript aims at discussing the Estimand framework for dose optimization trials in oncology considering efficacy and toxicity through utility functions. Such trials should include Pharmacokinetics (PK) data, toxicity data, and efficacy data. Based on these data, the analysis methods used to identify the optimized dose/s are also described. Focusing on optimizing the utility function to estimate the OBD, the population-level summary measure should reflect only the properties used for the estimating this utility function. A detailed strategy recommendation for intercurrent events has been provided using a real-life oncology case study. Key recommendations regarding the estimand attributes include that in a seamless Phase I/II dose optimization trial, the treatment attribute should start when the subject receives the first dose. We argue that such a framework brings in additional clarity to dose optimization trial objectives and strengthens the understanding of the drug under consideration that would enable the correct dose to move to Phase II of clinical development.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ayon Mukherjee, Jonathan L. Moscovici, Zheng Liu. 2025-08-17. Estimands for Early Phase Dose Optimization Trials in Oncology. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18930

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bias-Correction for Privacy-Protected Spatial Autoregressive Models with Application to Restaurant Network Analysis

Spatial autoregressive (SAR) models and their extensions are important tools for studying network effects. However, with an increasing emphasis on data privacy, data providers often implement protection measures that render standard SAR models inapplicable. In this study, we introduce a privacy-protected SAR model that incorporates noise into both the response and covariates to meet privacy requirements. With noise present in both components, the traditional quasi-maximum likelihood estimator becomes difficult to compute because the likelihood function cannot be directly formulated. To bypass this hurdle, we begin with a pseudo-likelihood approach, initially omitting the noise in the covariates. A Newton-Raphson algorithm is then applied to compute the estimator; however, the estimator is biased. To address this, we propose a bias-corrected Newton-Raphson-type algorithm that simultaneously accounts for noise in both the response and covariates. We further show, under appropriate regularity conditions, that the resulting estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal. To further enhance computational efficiency, we also develop a bias-corrected least squares estimator. Several extensions are discussed, and the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through extensive simulations. We apply the proposed methodology to restaurant transaction data from a third-party payment platform. Our method identifies a statistically significant competitive network effect among restaurants and further reveals meaningful restaurant-customer interaction patterns.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

A variational framework for modal estimation

Multivariate mode estimation arises in many statistical problems such as inverse problems, multimodal sampling, and density-based clustering, but becomes challenging in moderate to high dimensions, especially when the underlying density is not directly evaluable. We introduce GERVE (Gibbs-measure Entropy-Regularized Variational Estimation), a sample-based method for estimating multivariate modes by approximating Gibbs distributions directly from samples, without estimating or evaluating the density. GERVE uses Gaussian-mixture variational annealing and natural-gradient optimization, producing a mixture concentrated in high-density regions whose component responsibilities also provide a clustering of the observations. We prove theoretical guarantees in two regimes: as the Gibbs temperature goes to zero, the optimal variational mixture concentrates around the global modes of the population density; at fixed positive temperature, we prove existence, consistency, and asymptotic normality of empirical maximizers and propose a bootstrap procedure for uncertainty quantification. Simulations and a real-data experiment show that GERVE accurately recovers modes and produces meaningful clusters.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Objective Model Prior Probabilities in Variable Selection

For many years it was routine to use equal model prior probabilities in Bayesian model uncertainty analysis. At least twenty years ago it became clear that this was problematic, leading to support of much too large models in the increasingly huge model spaces being considered in genomics and other fields. A popular replacement was to adopt a suggestion of Harold Jeffreys for the variable selection problem in which a total of $k$ possible variables are being considered for inclusion in the model: give the collection of all models containing $d$ variables ($d = 0, . . . , k$) prior probability $1/(k + 1)$ and then divide this prior probability equally among the models in the collection. Many other choices of model prior probabilities that impose severe parsimony have also been introduced. We begin by reviewing the problems with using equal model prior probabilities and then discuss some serious problems with the Jeffreys choice. Finally, we introduce and study a number of objective alternative choices of model prior probabilities, from both numerical and theoretical perspectives.

stat.ME↗