{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,24]],"date-time":"2026-07-24T02:00:31Z","timestamp":1784858431735,"version":"3.55.0"},"reference-count":67,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,27]],"date-time":"2026-05-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1779840000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,24]],"date-time":"2026-07-24T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1784851200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":58,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Med Res Methodol"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Introduction<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Over the past decades, the advent of new therapeutics such as immunotherapies and targeted therapies has challenged conventional clinical trial designs, such as single-arm studies. Selecting a single dose in phase I trials with short follow-up, typically based solely on toxicity endpoints, has been shown to lead to suboptimal dosing decisions. Consequently, dose optimization is now increasingly encouraged in oncology. This study was motivated by the case of ibrutinib in chronic lymphocytic leukemia, for which the initially approved dose of 420 mg\/day, determined using conventional phase I designs based on the maximum tolerated dose, was later shown to achieve comparable response rates at lower doses. This example highlights the potential value of dose-ranging phase II studies in oncology. Assuming that borrowing information across doses can improve statistical power, our objective was to compare several strategies for information borrowing in phase II randomized trials involving multiple doses of the same drug.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The backbone design considered was the Bayesian Optimal Phase II (BOP2) design, adapted to a multi-arm setting and allowing for co-primary binary endpoints as well as interim analyses. This design relies on a multinomial conjugate model to describe the endpoints within a Bayesian framework, with decision rules for early stopping due to futility and\/or toxicity based on posterior probabilities. We adapted and compared several information-borrowing approaches to estimate efficacy and toxicity: (i) power prior, (ii) Bayesian hierarchical modeling, (iii) Bayesian calibrated hierarchical modeling, and (iv) Bayesian logistic regression. These approaches were applied alongside BOP2 decision rules. In addition, a Simon\u2019s two-stage design with added toxicity monitoring was used as a comparator. A simulation study was conducted to evaluate the operating characteristics of the designs, using a hypothetical randomized dose-ranging trial with efficacy and toxicity as co-primary endpoints against reference values.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Our results indicate that the power prior, without dynamic adaptation of the borrowing strength, is unsuitable in this context as it substantially increases the false positive rate. Bayesian hierarchical modeling shrinks estimates toward a common mean, reducing variance but also leading to inflated false positive rates. In contrast, Bayesian logistic regression provides a more balanced trade-off, achieving moderate gains in power while increasing the false positive rates.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>In multi-arm trials, the BOP2 design without information borrowing offers stricter control of the false positive rate than borrowing-based approaches when only toxic or futile doses are considered. Nevertheless, Bayesian logistic regression modeling of the dose\u2013toxicity and dose\u2013efficacy relationships, combined with BOP2 decision rules, could be considered as a possible approach for borrowing information in dose-ranging studies with a limited number of doses.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-026-02883-4","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,27]],"date-time":"2026-05-27T13:44:16Z","timestamp":1779889456000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Information borrowing in phase II randomized dose-ranging clinical trials in oncology"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"26","author":[{"given":"Guillaume","family":"Mulier","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Vincent","family":"L\u00e9vy","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Lucie","family":"Biard","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,27]]},"reference":[{"issue":"4","key":"2883_CR1","first-page":"48","volume":"3","author":"L Rubinstein","year":"2014","unstructured":"Rubinstein L. Phase II design: history and evolution. Chin Clin Oncol. 2014;3(4):48.","journal-title":"Chin Clin Oncol"},{"issue":"12","key":"2883_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3259","DOI":"10.1007\/s11095-022-03380-1","volume":"39","author":"T Qi","year":"2022","unstructured":"Qi T, Dunlap T, Cao Y. Embracing project optimus: can we leverage evolutionary theory to optimize dosing in oncology? Pharm Res. 2022;39(12):3259\u201365.","journal-title":"Pharm Res"},{"issue":"31","key":"2883_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3423","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.21.01371","volume":"39","author":"MJ Ratain","year":"2021","unstructured":"Ratain MJ, Tannock IF, Lichter AS. Dose optimization of sotorasib: is the US Food and Drug Administration sending a message? J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(31):3423\u20136.","journal-title":"J Clin Oncol"},{"issue":"12","key":"2883_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1255","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djz126","volume":"111","author":"MJ Grayling","year":"2019","unstructured":"Grayling MJ, Dimairo M, Mander AP, Jaki TF. A review of perspectives on the use of randomization in phase II oncology trials. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019;111(12):1255\u201362.","journal-title":"JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"175","DOI":"10.1038\/s41392-024-01856-7","volume":"9","author":"B Liu","year":"2024","unstructured":"Liu B, Zhou H, Tan L, Siu KTH, Guan XY. Exploring treatment options in cancer: tumor treatment strategies. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2024;9(1):175.","journal-title":"Signal Transduct Target Ther"},{"issue":"4","key":"2883_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"235","DOI":"10.1038\/nrd.2015.35","volume":"15","author":"A Hoos","year":"2016","unstructured":"Hoos A. Development of immuno-oncology drugs\u2013from CTLA4 to PD1 to the next generations. Nat Rev Drug Discovery. 2016;15(4):235\u201347.","journal-title":"Nat Rev Drug Discovery"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"141","DOI":"10.1080\/10543406.2015.1092030","volume":"26","author":"A Ivanova","year":"2016","unstructured":"Ivanova A, Paul B, Marchenko O, Song G, Patel N, Moschos SJ. Nine-year change in statistical design, profile, and success rates of phase II oncology trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2016;26(1):141\u20139.","journal-title":"J Biopharm Stat"},{"issue":"2","key":"2883_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"273","DOI":"10.1093\/biostatistics\/kxx069","volume":"20","author":"CH Wong","year":"2019","unstructured":"Wong CH, Siah KW, Lo AW. Estimation of clinical trial success rates and related parameters. Biostatistics. 2019;20(2):273\u201386.","journal-title":"Biostatistics"},{"issue":"30","key":"2883_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3489","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.22.00371","volume":"40","author":"J Fourie Zirkelbach","year":"2022","unstructured":"Fourie Zirkelbach J, Shah M, Vallejo J, Cheng J, Ayyoub A, Liu J, et al. Improving dose-optimization processes used in oncology drug development to minimize toxicity and maximize benefit to patients. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(30):3489\u2013500.","journal-title":"J Clin Oncol"},{"issue":"9","key":"2883_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2127","DOI":"10.1158\/1078-0432.CCR-15-1855","volume":"22","author":"D Roda","year":"2016","unstructured":"Roda D, Jimenez B, Banerji U. Are doses and schedules of small-molecule targeted anticancer drugs recommended by phase I studies realistic? Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(9):2127\u201332.","journal-title":"Clin Cancer Res"},{"issue":"16","key":"2883_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1445","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMp2109826","volume":"385","author":"M Shah","year":"2021","unstructured":"Shah M, Rahman A, Theoret MR, Pazdur R. The drug-dosing conundrum in oncology\u2013when less is more. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(16):1445\u20137.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"3","key":"2883_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"487","DOI":"10.1002\/cpt.1853","volume":"108","author":"AV Serritella","year":"2020","unstructured":"Serritella AV, Strohbehn GW, Goldstein DA, Lichter AS, Ratain MJ. Interventional pharmacoeconomics: a novel mechanism for unlocking value. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020;108(3):487\u201393.","journal-title":"Clin Pharmacol Ther"},{"key":"2883_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Heiss B, Pan L, Akalu A, Vallejo J, Cheng J, Balcazar P, et\u00a0al.. Dosage optimization in drug development: An FDA Project Optimus analysis of postmarketing requirements issued to repair the cracks. American Society of Clinical Oncology; 2023.","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.1598"},{"issue":"3","key":"2883_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"248","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.24.00310","volume":"43","author":"H Singh","year":"2024","unstructured":"Singh H, Vellanki PJ, Pazdur R. The Retrofit: Lessons From Sotorasib\u2019s Dosing Conundrum. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2024;43(3):248\u201350.","journal-title":"J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol"},{"issue":"9","key":"2883_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"503","DOI":"10.1038\/nrclinonc.2014.135","volume":"11","author":"MJ Ratain","year":"2014","unstructured":"Ratain MJ. Redefining the primary objective of phase I oncology trials. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014;11(9):503\u20134.","journal-title":"Nat Rev Clin Oncol"},{"key":"2883_CR16","unstructured":"FDA oncology center of excellence, center for drug evaluation and research, center for biologics evaluation and research. Optimizing the dosage of human prescription drugs and biological products for the treatment of oncologic diseases guidance for industry. 2024.https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/regulatory-information\/search-fda-guidance-documents\/optimizing-dosage-human-prescription-drugs-and-biological-products-treatment-oncologic-diseases. Accessed 29 May 2025."},{"issue":"5","key":"2883_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"691","DOI":"10.1002\/psp4.13079","volume":"13","author":"W Gao","year":"2024","unstructured":"Gao W, Liu J, Shtylla B, Venkatakrishnan K, Yin D, Shah M, et al. Realizing the promise of Project Optimus: Challenges and emerging opportunities for dose optimization in oncology drug development. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2024;13(5):691\u2013709. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/psp4.13079.","journal-title":"CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol"},{"key":"2883_CR18","unstructured":"FDA. Project Optimus. 2024. https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/about-fda\/oncology-center-excellence\/project-optimus. Accessed 30 Dec 2025."},{"issue":"5","key":"2883_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"492","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/djac232","volume":"115","author":"EL Korn","year":"2023","unstructured":"Korn EL, Moscow JA, Freidlin B. Dose optimization during drug development: whether and when to optimize. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 2023;115(5):492\u20137.","journal-title":"JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"16","key":"2883_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3586","DOI":"10.1158\/1078-0432.CCR-14-2225","volume":"21","author":"RA de Claro","year":"2015","unstructured":"de Claro RA, McGinn KM, Verdun N, Lee SL, Chiu HJ, Saber H, et al. FDA approval: ibrutinib for patients with previously treated mantle cell lymphoma and previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(16):3586\u201390.","journal-title":"Clin Cancer Res"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"88","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.2012.42.7906","volume":"31","author":"RH Advani","year":"2013","unstructured":"Advani RH, Buggy JJ, Sharman JP, Smith SM, Boyd TE, Grant B, et al. Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib (PCI-32765) has significant activity in patients with relapsed\/refractory B-cell malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(1):88\u201394.","journal-title":"J Clin Oncol"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"32","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1215637","volume":"369","author":"JC Byrd","year":"2013","unstructured":"Byrd JC, Furman RR, Coutre SE, Flinn IW, Burger JA, Blum KA, et al. Targeting BTK with ibrutinib in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(1):32\u201342.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"6","key":"2883_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"507","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1306220","volume":"369","author":"ML Wang","year":"2013","unstructured":"Wang ML, Rule S, Martin P, Goy A, Auer R, Kahl BS, et al. Targeting BTK with ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(6):507\u201316.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"15","key":"2883_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1430","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1501548","volume":"372","author":"SP Treon","year":"2015","unstructured":"Treon SP, Tripsas CK, Meid K, Warren D, Varma G, Green R, et al. Ibrutinib in previously treated Waldenstr\u00f6m\u2019s macroglobulinemia. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(15):1430\u201340.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"25","key":"2883_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2425","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1509388","volume":"373","author":"JA Burger","year":"2015","unstructured":"Burger JA, Tedeschi A, Barr PM, Robak T, Owen C, Ghia P, et al. Ibrutinib as initial therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(25):2425\u201337.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"5","key":"2883_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"432","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1817073","volume":"381","author":"TD Shanafelt","year":"2019","unstructured":"Shanafelt TD, Wang XV, Kay NE, Hanson CA, O\u2019Brien S, Barrientos J, et al. Ibrutinib-rituximab or chemoimmunotherapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(5):432\u201343.","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"35","key":"2883_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4959","DOI":"10.2217\/fon-2021-0964","volume":"17","author":"JZ Hou","year":"2021","unstructured":"Hou JZ, Ryan K, Du S, Fang B, Marks S, Page R, et al. Real-world ibrutinib dose reductions, holds and discontinuations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Future Oncol. 2021;17(35):4959\u201369.","journal-title":"Future Oncol"},{"issue":"21","key":"2883_CR28","first-page":"2249","volume":"132","author":"LS Chen","year":"2018","unstructured":"Chen LS, Bose P, Cruz ND, Jiang Y, Wu Q, Thompson PA, et al. A pilot study of lower doses of ibrutinib in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood J Am Soc Hematol. 2018;132(21):2249\u201359.","journal-title":"Blood J Am Soc Hematol"},{"issue":"3","key":"2883_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"694","DOI":"10.1093\/annonc\/mdx795","volume":"29","author":"F Yan","year":"2018","unstructured":"Yan F, Thall P, Lu K, Gilbert M, Yuan Y. Phase I-II clinical trial design: a state-of-the-art paradigm for dose finding. Ann Oncol. 2018;29(3):694\u20139.","journal-title":"Ann Oncol"},{"key":"2883_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1393","DOI":"10.1200\/PO.20.00257","volume":"4","author":"R Lin","year":"2020","unstructured":"Lin R, Zhou Y, Yan F, Li D, Yuan Y. BOIN12: Bayesian optimal interval phase I\/II trial design for utility-based dose finding in immunotherapy and targeted therapies. JCO Precis Oncol. 2020;4:1393\u2013402.","journal-title":"JCO Precis Oncol"},{"issue":"4","key":"2883_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2907","DOI":"10.1111\/biom.13840","volume":"79","author":"B Guo","year":"2023","unstructured":"Guo B, Yuan Y. DROID: dose-ranging approach to optimizing dose in oncology drug development. Biometrics. 2023;79(4):2907\u201319.","journal-title":"Biometrics"},{"issue":"5","key":"2883_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"797","DOI":"10.1002\/pst.2306","volume":"22","author":"J Zhang","year":"2023","unstructured":"Zhang J, Chen X, Li B, Yan F. A comparative study of adaptive trial designs for dose optimization. Pharm Stat. 2023;22(5):797\u2013814.","journal-title":"Pharm Stat"},{"key":"2883_CR33","volume-title":"Bayesian designs for phase I-II clinical trials","author":"Y Yuan","year":"2016","unstructured":"Yuan Y, Nguyen HQ, Thall PF. Bayesian designs for phase I-II clinical trials. New York: Chapman & Hall\/CRC; 2016."},{"key":"2883_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"112916","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejca.2023.05.005","volume":"189","author":"T Jaki","year":"2023","unstructured":"Jaki T, Burdon A, Chen X, Mozgunov P, Zheng H, Baird R. Early phase clinical trials in oncology: Realising the potential of seamless designs. Eur J Cancer. 2023;189:112916.","journal-title":"Eur J Cancer"},{"issue":"3","key":"2883_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"273","DOI":"10.1177\/17407745231207085","volume":"21","author":"Y Yuan","year":"2024","unstructured":"Yuan Y, Zhou H, Liu S. Statistical and practical considerations in planning and conduct of dose-optimization trials. Clin Trials. 2024;21(3):273\u201386.","journal-title":"Clin Trials"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"48","DOI":"10.1016\/j.annonc.2022.09.158","volume":"34","author":"D Araujo","year":"2023","unstructured":"Araujo D, Greystoke A, Bates S, Bayle A, Calvo E, Castelo-Branco L, et al. Oncology phase I trial design and conduct: time for a change-MDICT Guidelines 2022. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(1):48\u201360.","journal-title":"Ann Oncol"},{"issue":"4","key":"2883_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"487","DOI":"10.1198\/sbr.2010.09045","volume":"2","author":"V Dragalin","year":"2010","unstructured":"Dragalin V, Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Miller F, Padmanabhan SK, Patel N, et al. A simulation study to compare new adaptive dose-ranging designs. Stat Biopharm Res. 2010;2(4):487\u2013512.","journal-title":"Stat Biopharm Res"},{"key":"2883_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Chen K, Zhou H, Lee JJ, Yuan Y. BOP2-TE: Bayesian optimal phase 2 design for jointly monitoring efficacy and toxicity with application to dose optimization. J Biopharm Stat. 2026;36(1):43\u201358.","DOI":"10.1080\/10543406.2024.2429481"},{"issue":"2","key":"2883_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"123","DOI":"10.1002\/pst.1730","volume":"15","author":"B Neuenschwander","year":"2016","unstructured":"Neuenschwander B, Wandel S, Roychoudhury S, Bailey S. Robust exchangeability designs for early phase clinical trials with multiple strata. Pharm Stat. 2016;15(2):123\u201334.","journal-title":"Pharm Stat"},{"key":"2883_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Daniells L, Mozgunov P, Barnett H, Bedding A, Jaki T. How to add baskets to an ongoing basket trial with information borrowing. Stat Methods Med Res. 2025;34(4):717\u201334.","DOI":"10.1177\/09622802251316961"},{"issue":"5","key":"2883_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"720","DOI":"10.1177\/1740774513497539","volume":"10","author":"SM Berry","year":"2013","unstructured":"Berry SM, Broglio KR, Groshen S, Berry DA. Bayesian hierarchical modeling of patient subpopulations: efficient designs of phase II oncology clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2013;10(5):720\u201334.","journal-title":"Clin Trials"},{"issue":"2","key":"2883_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"149","DOI":"10.1177\/1740774518755122","volume":"15","author":"Y Chu","year":"2018","unstructured":"Chu Y, Yuan Y. A Bayesian basket trial design using a calibrated Bayesian hierarchical model. Clin Trials. 2018;15(2):149\u201358.","journal-title":"Clin Trials"},{"issue":"10\u201312","key":"2883_CR43","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e70090","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.70090","volume":"44","author":"J Zhang","year":"2025","unstructured":"Zhang J, Zhou H, Wages NA, Guo Z, Liu F, Jemielita T, et al. TODO: A Triple-Outcome Double-Criterion Optimal Design for Dose Monitoring-and-Optimization in Multi-Dose Randomized Trials. Stat Med. 2025;44(10\u201312):e70090.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"17","key":"2883_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3123","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.8167","volume":"38","author":"BJ Gajewski","year":"2019","unstructured":"Gajewski BJ, Meinzer C, Berry SM, Rockswold GL, Barsan WG, Korley FK, et al. Bayesian hierarchical EMAX model for dose-response in early phase efficacy clinical trials. Stat Med. 2019;38(17):3123\u201338.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"194","DOI":"10.1186\/s12874-020-01071-2","volume":"20","author":"X Huang","year":"2020","unstructured":"Huang X, Gajewski BJ. Comparison of hierarchical EMAX and NDLM models in dose-response for early phase clinical trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):194.","journal-title":"BMC Med Res Methodol"},{"issue":"2","key":"2883_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"114","DOI":"10.1002\/pst.1793","volume":"16","author":"S Yada","year":"2017","unstructured":"Yada S, Hamada C. Application of Bayesian hierarchical models for phase I\/II clinical trials in oncology. Pharm Stat. 2017;16(2):114\u201321.","journal-title":"Pharm Stat"},{"issue":"7","key":"2883_CR47","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2200288","DOI":"10.1002\/bimj.202200288","volume":"65","author":"JL Jim\u00e9nez","year":"2023","unstructured":"Jim\u00e9nez JL, Zheng H. A Bayesian adaptive design for dual-agent phase I-II oncology trials integrating efficacy data across stages. Biom J. 2023;65(7):2200288.","journal-title":"Biom J"},{"key":"2883_CR48","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"107278","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cct.2023.107278","volume":"132","author":"Z Jiang","year":"2023","unstructured":"Jiang Z, Mi G, Lin J, Lorenzato C, Ji Y. A Multi-Arm Two-Stage (MATS) design for proof-of-concept and dose optimization in early-phase oncology trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2023;132:107278.","journal-title":"Contemp Clin Trials"},{"key":"2883_CR49","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Mulier G, Chevret S, Lin R, Biard L. Bayesian optimal designs for multi-arm multi-stage phase II randomized clinical trials with multiple endpoints. Stat Biopharm Res. 2024;16(3):315\u201325.","DOI":"10.1080\/19466315.2024.2344543"},{"issue":"21","key":"2883_CR50","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3302","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.7338","volume":"36","author":"H Zhou","year":"2017","unstructured":"Zhou H, Lee JJ, Yuan Y. BOP2: Bayesian optimal design for phase II clinical trials with simple and complex endpoints. Stat Med. 2017;36(21):3302\u201314.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"key":"2883_CR51","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Thall PF, Simon R, Ellenberg SS. A two-stage design for choosing among several experimental treatments and a control in clinical trials. Biometrics. 1989;45(2):537\u201347.","DOI":"10.2307\/2531495"},{"key":"2883_CR52","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Chen MH, Ibrahim JG. Power prior distributions for regression models. Stat Sci. 2000;15(1):46\u201360.","DOI":"10.1214\/ss\/1009212673"},{"key":"2883_CR53","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Spiegelhalter DJ, Abrams KR, Myles JP. Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health-care evaluation. Wiley; 2004.","DOI":"10.1002\/0470092602"},{"issue":"13","key":"2883_CR54","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2420","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.3230","volume":"27","author":"B Neuenschwander","year":"2008","unstructured":"Neuenschwander B, Branson M, Gsponer T. Critical aspects of the Bayesian approach to phase I cancer trials. Stat Med. 2008;27(13):2420\u201339.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR55","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/0197-2456(89)90015-9","volume":"10","author":"R Simon","year":"1989","unstructured":"Simon R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10(1):1\u201310.","journal-title":"Control Clin Trials"},{"issue":"2","key":"2883_CR56","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"540","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1541-0420.2005.00311.x","volume":"61","author":"A Ivanova","year":"2005","unstructured":"Ivanova A, Qaqish BF, Schell MJ. Continuous toxicity monitoring in phase II trials in oncology. Biometrics. 2005;61(2):540\u20135.","journal-title":"Biometrics"},{"issue":"4","key":"2883_CR57","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"357","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.4780140404","volume":"14","author":"PF Thall","year":"1995","unstructured":"Thall PF, Simon RM, Estey EH. Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single-arm clinical trials with multiple outcomes. Stat Med. 1995;14(4):357\u201379.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"4","key":"2883_CR58","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1023","DOI":"10.1111\/biom.12242","volume":"70","author":"H Schmidli","year":"2014","unstructured":"Schmidli H, Gsteiger S, Roychoudhury S, O\u2019Hagan A, Spiegelhalter D, Neuenschwander B. Robust meta-analytic-predictive priors in clinical trials with historical control information. Biometrics. 2014;70(4):1023\u201332.","journal-title":"Biometrics"},{"issue":"4","key":"2883_CR59","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"423","DOI":"10.1080\/19466315.2022.2050290","volume":"14","author":"Y Zhao","year":"2022","unstructured":"Zhao Y, Yang B, Lee JJ, Wang L, Yuan Y. Bayesian optimal phase II design for randomized clinical trials. Stat Biopharm Res. 2022;14(4):423\u201332.","journal-title":"Stat Biopharm Res"},{"issue":"1","key":"2883_CR60","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"41","DOI":"10.1002\/pst.1589","volume":"13","author":"K Viele","year":"2014","unstructured":"Viele K, Berry S, Neuenschwander B, Amzal B, Chen F, Enas N, et al. Use of historical control data for assessing treatment effects in clinical trials. Pharm Stat. 2014;13(1):41\u201354.","journal-title":"Pharm Stat"},{"issue":"3","key":"2883_CR61","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"684","DOI":"10.1111\/j.0006-341X.2004.00218.x","volume":"60","author":"PF Thall","year":"2004","unstructured":"Thall PF, Cook JD. Dose-finding based on efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Biometrics. 2004;60(3):684\u201393.","journal-title":"Biometrics"},{"issue":"28","key":"2883_CR62","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"S5299","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.8361","volume":"38","author":"Y Zhou","year":"2019","unstructured":"Zhou Y, Lee JJ, Yuan Y. A utility-based Bayesian optimal interval (U-BOIN) phase I\/II design to identify the optimal biological dose for targeted and immune therapies. Stat Med. 2019;38(28):S5299\u2013316.","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"key":"2883_CR63","unstructured":"FDA. Draft guidance, Use of Bayesian Methodology in Clinical Trials of Drug and Biological Products, Guidance for Industry. 2026. https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/media\/190505\/download. Accessed 24 Mar 2026."},{"key":"2883_CR64","unstructured":"EMA. Concept Paper for the Development of a Reflection Paper 4 on the use of Bayesian methods in clinical development. 2026. https:\/\/www.ema.europa.eu\/en\/documents\/scientific-guideline\/concept-paper-development-reflection-paper-use-bayesian-methods-clinical-development_en.pdf. Accessed 24 Mar 2026."},{"key":"2883_CR65","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Evans SR, Fleming TR, Janes H, Dodd LE. Reflections on FDA draft guidance on Bayesian methods in trials\u2014protecting scientific integrity and evidentiary standards. JAMA. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2026.4175.\u00a0Published online 23 Mar 2026.","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2026.4175"},{"key":"2883_CR66","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Gelman A, van Zwet E, Wi\u0119cek W. FDA draft guidance for the use of Bayesian methods in clinical trials. JAMA. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2026.4178. Published online 23 Mar 2026.","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2026.4178"},{"key":"2883_CR67","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Lee JJ, Harrell\u00a0Jr FE, LaVange LM, Spiegelhalter DJ. Embracing Bayesian methods in clinical trials: FDA\u2019s long-awaited draft guidance. JAMA. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2026.4179.\u00a0Published online 2026.","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2026.4179"}],"container-title":["BMC Medical Research Methodology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12874-026-02883-4","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12874-026-02883-4.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12874-026-02883-4.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,24]],"date-time":"2026-07-24T01:02:43Z","timestamp":1784854963000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1186\/s12874-026-02883-4"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,27]]},"references-count":67,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,12]]}},"alternative-id":["2883"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12874-026-02883-4","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-2288"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-2288","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,27]]},"assertion":[{"value":"13 January 2026","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"13 May 2026","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"27 May 2026","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","label":"Consent for publication","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"The authors declare no competing interests.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","label":"Competing interests","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}}],"article-number":"164"}}