Abstract
In drug development, early phase dose-finding clinical trials are carried out to identify an optimal dose to administer to patients in larger confirmatory clinical trials. Standard trial procedures do not optimize for participant benefit and do not consider participant heterogeneity, despite consequences to the health of participants and downstream impacts to under-represented population subgroups. Additionally, many newly investigated drugs do not obey modelling assumptions made in common dose-finding procedures. We present Safe Allocation for Exploration of Treatments (SAFE-T), a procedure for adaptive dose-finding that works well with small samples sizes and improves the utility for heterogeneous participants while adhering to safety constraints for treatment arm allocation. SAFE-T flexibly learns models for drug toxicity and efficacy without requiring strong prior assumptions and provides final recommendations for optimal dose by participant subgroup. We provide a preliminary evaluation of SAFE-T on a comprehensive set of realistic synthetic dose-finding scenarios, illustrating the improved performance of SAFE-T with respect to safety, utility, and dose recommendation accuracy across heterogeneous participants against a comparable baseline method.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Phases of clinical trials (2022). https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/find-a-clinical-trial/what-clinical-trials-are/phases-of-clinical-trials
Aziz, M., Kaufmann, E., Riviere, M.K.: On multi-armed bandit designs for dose-finding trials. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 22, 14:1–14:38 (2020)
Baek, J., Farias, V.F.: Fair exploration via axiomatic bargaining. In: Neural Information Processing Systems (2021)
Brøgger-Mikkelsen, M., Ali, Z.S., Zibert, J.R., Andersen, A.D., Thomsen, S.F.: Online patient recruitment in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Med. Internet Res. 22 (2020)
Chien, I., Deliu, N., Turner, R.E., Weller, A., Villar, S.S., Kilbertus, N.: Multi-disciplinary fairness considerations in machine learning for clinical trials. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (2022)
Dickmann, L.J., Schutzman, J.L.: Racial and ethnic composition of cancer clinical drug trials: how diverse are we? Oncologist 23(2), 243–246 (2018)
Hensman, J., de G. Matthews, A.G., Ghahramani, Z.: Scalable variational gaussian process classification. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (2014)
Huang, J., et al.: Sample sizes in dosage investigational clinical trials: a systematic evaluation. Drug Design Dev. Ther. 9, 305–312 (2015)
Jones, D.R., Schonlau, M., Welch, W.J.: Efficient global optimization of expensive black-box functions. J. Global Optim. 13, 455–492 (1998)
Journel, A.G., Huijbregts, C.J.: Mining geostatistics (1976)
Kazerouni, A., Ghavamzadeh, M., Abbasi, Y., Roy, B.V.: Conservative contextual linear bandits. In: NIPS (2016)
Koopmeiners, J.S., Modiano, J.F.: A Bayesian adaptive phase I–II clinical trial for evaluating efficacy and toxicity with delayed outcomes. Clin. Trials 11, 38–48 (2014)
Kurzrock, R., Lin, C., Wu, T.C., Hobbs, B.P., Pestana, R.C., Hong, D.S.: Moving beyond 3+3: the future of clinical trial design. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Educ. Book. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. Ann. Meet. 41, e133–e144 (2021)
Lee, H.S., Shen, C., Jordon, J., van der Schaar, M.: Contextual constrained learning for dose-finding clinical trials. Ar**v abs/2001.02463 (2020)
Özdemir, B.C., Gerard, C.L., da Silva, C.E.: Sex and gender differences in anticancer treatment toxicity - a call for revisiting drug dosing in oncology. Endocrinology (2022)
Pfohl, S.R., Xu, Y., Foryciarz, A., Ignatiadis, N., Genkins, J.Z., Shah, N.H.: Net benefit, calibration, threshold selection, and training objectives for algorithmic fairness in healthcare. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (2022)
Raghavan, M., Slivkins, A., Vaughan, J.W., Wu, Z.S.: The externalities of exploration and how data diversity helps exploitation. In: Annual Conference Computational Learning Theory (2018)
Ramamoorthy, A., Kim, H.H., Shah-Williams, E., Zhang, L.: Racial and ethnic differences in drug disposition and response: Review of new molecular entities approved between 2014 and 2019. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 62 (2021)
Riviere, M.K., Yuan, Y., Jourdan, J.H., Dubois, F., Zohar, S.: Phase I/II dose-finding design for molecularly targeted agent: plateau determination using adaptive randomization. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 27, 466–479 (2018)
Shen, C., Wang, Z., Villar, S.S., van der Schaar, M.: Learning for dose allocation in adaptive clinical trials with safety constraints. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (2020)
Steinberg, J.R., et al.: Analysis of female enrollment and participant sex by burden of disease in us clinical trials between 2000 and 2020. JAMA Netw. Open 4 (2021)
Sui, Y., Gotovos, A., Burdick, J.W., Krause, A.: Safe exploration for optimization with gaussian processes. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (2015)
Sui, Y., Zhuang, V., Burdick, J.W., Yue, Y.: Stagewise safe Bayesian optimization with gaussian processes. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (2018)
Thall, P.F., Cook, J.D.: Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics 60, 684–693 (2004)
Thomas, M., Bornkamp, B., Seibold, H.: Subgroup identification in dose-finding trials via model-based recursive partitioning. Stat. Med. 37, 1608–1624 (2018)
Unger, J.M., et al.: Sex differences in risk of severe adverse events in patients receiving immunotherapy, targeted therapy, or chemotherapy in cancer clinical trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 40, 1474–1486 (2022)
Villar, S.S., Bowden, J., Wason, J.M.S.: Multi-armed bandit models for the optimal design of clinical trials: benefits and challenges. Stat. Sci.: Rev. J. Inst. Math. Stat. 30(2), 199–215 (2015)
Wages, N.A., Chiuzan, C., Panageas, K.S.: Design considerations for early-phase clinical trials of immune-oncology agents. J. Immunother. Cancer 6, 1–10 (2018)
Wheeler, G.M., et al.: How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 19, 1–15 (2019)
Zucker, I., Prendergast, B.J.: Sex differences in pharmacokinetics predict adverse drug reactions in women. Biol. Sex Differ. 11, 1–14 (2020)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
1 Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chien, I., Hernandez, J.G., Turner, R.E. (2023). Safe Exploration in Dose Finding Clinical Trials with Heterogeneous Participants. In: Chen, H., Luo, L. (eds) Trustworthy Machine Learning for Healthcare. TML4H 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13932. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39539-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39539-0_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-39538-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-39539-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)