IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v170y2007i3p517-579.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Statistical issues in first‐in‐man studies

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Senn
  • Dipti Amin
  • Rosemary A. Bailey
  • Sheila M. Bird
  • Barbara Bogacka
  • Peter Colman
  • Andrew Garrett
  • Andrew Grieve
  • Peter Lachmann

Abstract

Preface. In March 2006 a first‐in‐man trial took place using healthy volunteers involving the use of monoclonal antibodies. Within hours the subjects had suffered such adverse effects that they were admitted to intensive care at Northwick Park Hospital. In April 2006 the Secretary of State for Health announced the appointment of Professor (now Sir) Gordon Duff, who chairs the UK's Commission on Human Medicines, to chair a scientific expert group on phase 1 clinical trials. The group reported on December 7th, 2006 (Expert Scientific Group on Clinical Trials, 2006a). Clinical trials have a well‐established regulatory basis both in the UK and worldwide. Trials have to be approved by the regulatory authority and are subject to a detailed protocol concerning, among other things, the study design and statistical analyses that will form the basis of the evaluation. In fact, a cornerstone of the regulatory framework is the statistical theory and methods that underpin clinical trials. As a result, the Royal Statistical Society established an expert group of its own to look in detail at the statistical issues that might be relevant to first‐in‐man studies. The group mainly comprised senior Fellows of the Society who had expert knowledge of the theory and application of statistics in clinical trials. However, the group also included an expert immunologist and clinicians to ensure that the interface between statistics and clinical disciplines was not overlooked. In addition, expert representation was sought from Statisticians in the Pharmaceutical Industry (PSI), an organization with which the Royal Statistical Society has very close links. The output from the Society's expert group is contained in this report. It makes a number of recommendations directed towards the statistical aspects of clinical trials. As such it complements the report by Professor Duff's group and will, I trust, contribute to a safer framework for first‐in‐man trials in the future. Tim Holt (President, Royal Statistical Society)

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Senn & Dipti Amin & Rosemary A. Bailey & Sheila M. Bird & Barbara Bogacka & Peter Colman & Andrew Garrett & Andrew Grieve & Peter Lachmann, 2007. "Statistical issues in first‐in‐man studies," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 170(3), pages 517-579, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:170:y:2007:i:3:p:517-579
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2007.00481.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2007.00481.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2007.00481.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barnett S Kramer & Joan Wilentz & Duane Alexander & John Burklow & Lawrence M Friedman & Richard Hodes & Ruth Kirschstein & Amy Patterson & Griffin Rodgers & Stephen E Straus, 2006. "Getting It Right: Being Smarter about Clinical Trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(6), pages 1-1, April.
    2. P. Williamson & J. L. Hutton & J. Bliss & J. Blunt & M. J. Campbell & R. Nicholson, 2000. "Statistical review by research ethics committees," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 163(1), pages 5-13.
    3. David Simpson & Sue Lee, 2003. "Tobacco: public perceptions and the role of the industry," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 166(2), pages 233-239, June.
    4. C. P. Farrington & H. J. Whitaker, 2006. "Semiparametric analysis of case series data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 55(5), pages 553-594, November.
    5. F. Bretz & J. C. Pinheiro & M. Branson, 2005. "Combining Multiple Comparisons and Modeling Techniques in Dose-Response Studies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 738-748, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chaney, Paul, 2014. "Mixed-methods analysis of political parties׳ manifesto discourse on rail transport policy: Westminster, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish elections 1945–2011," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 275-285.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kathrin Möllenhoff & Frank Bretz & Holger Dette, 2020. "Equivalence of regression curves sharing common parameters," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 518-529, June.
    2. Francesco De Pretis & Barbara Osimani, 2019. "New Insights in Computational Methods for Pharmacovigilance: E-Synthesis , a Bayesian Framework for Causal Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Johan Verbeeck & Martin Geroldinger & Konstantin Thiel & Andrew Craig Hooker & Sebastian Ueckert & Mats Karlsson & Arne Cornelius Bathke & Johann Wolfgang Bauer & Geert Molenberghs & Georg Zimmermann, 2023. "How to analyze continuous and discrete repeated measures in small‐sample cross‐over trials?," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 3998-4011, December.
    4. Qiqi Deng & Kun Wang & Xiaofei Bai & Naitee Ting, 2019. "A Cautionary Note When a Dose-Ranging Study is Used for Proving the Concept," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 11(1), pages 127-140, April.
    5. Beibei Guo & Ying Yuan, 2023. "DROID: dose‐ranging approach to optimizing dose in oncology drug development," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 2907-2919, December.
    6. Musonda, Patrick & Hocine, Mounia N. & Whitaker, Heather J. & Farrington, C. Paddy, 2008. "Self-controlled case series analyses: Small-sample performance," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 1942-1957, January.
    7. C.-Y. Huang & J. Qin & M.-C. Wang, 2010. "Semiparametric Analysis for Recurrent Event Data with Time-Dependent Covariates and Informative Censoring," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(1), pages 39-49, March.
    8. Walters, SJ & Brazier, JE, 2002. "Sample sizes for the SF-6D preference based measure of health from the SF-36: a practical guide," MPRA Paper 29742, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Liu, W. & Ah-Kine, P. & Bretz, F. & Hayter, A.J., 2013. "Exact simultaneous confidence intervals for a finite set of contrasts of three, four or five generally correlated normal means," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 141-148.
    10. C. Paddy Farrington & Mounia N. Hocine, 2010. "Within‐individual dependence in self‐controlled case series models for recurrent events," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 59(3), pages 457-475, May.
    11. Ana M. Aranda & Tal Simons, 2023. "Clearing the Smoke: Regulations, Moral Legitimacy, and Performance in the U.S. Tobacco Industry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(4), pages 803-819, November.
    12. Kathrin Möllenhoff & Kirsten Schorning & Franziska Kappenberg, 2023. "Identifying alert concentrations using a model‐based bootstrap approach," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2076-2088, September.
    13. Miller, Frank & Dette, Holger & Guilbaud, Olivier, 2007. "Optimal designs for estimating the interesting part of a dose-effect curve," Technical Reports 2007,21, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    14. Dette, Holger & Scheder, Regine, 2008. "A finite sample comparison of nonparametric estimates of the effective dose in quantal bioassay," Technical Reports 2008,05, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    15. Jianan Peng & Chu‐In Charles Lee & Karelyn A. Davis & Weizhen Wang, 2008. "Stepwise Confidence Intervals for Monotone Dose–Response Studies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(3), pages 877-885, September.
    16. Nairanjana Dasgupta & Monte J. Shaffer, 2012. "Many-to-one comparison of nonlinear growth curves for Washington's Red Delicious apple," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(8), pages 1781-1795, April.
    17. Qiqi Deng & Xiaofei Bai & Dacheng Liu & Dooti Roy & Zhiliang Ying & Dan‐Yu Lin, 2019. "Power and sample size for dose‐finding studies with survival endpoints under model uncertainty," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 308-314, March.
    18. Yu, Jun & Kong, Xiangshun & Ai, Mingyao & Tsui, Kwok Leung, 2018. "Optimal designs for dose–response models with linear effects of covariates," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 217-228.
    19. Dette, Holger & Bretz, Frank, 2007. "Optimal designs for dose finding studies," Technical Reports 2007,01, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    20. C. Baayen & P. Hougaard & C. B. Pipper, 2015. "Testing effect of a drug using multiple nested models for the dose–response," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(2), pages 417-427, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:170:y:2007:i:3:p:517-579. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.