Back

Rationale and guidance for implementing the continual reassessment method for dose-finding in controlled human infection model studies

Weerasinghe, C.; Osowicki, J.; Simpson, J. A.; Crocker-Buque, T.; McCarthy, J.; Williams, E.; Price, D. J.

2026-07-17 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.07.16.26358128 medRxiv
Show abstract

Controlled human infection models (CHIMs) are increasingly used in infectious disease research to study pathogen dynamics and evaluate interventions under controlled conditions. However, these studies are resource-intensive and involve ethical and safety constraints, making efficient study design critical. Dose-finding is a key early component in CHIMs, where the aim is to identify a challenge dose that achieves a target infection probability. Traditional rule-based designs are commonly used but can be inefficient, motivating the use of model-based adaptive approaches such as the Bayesian Continual Reassessment Method (CRM). Although CRM has been extensively studied and widely adopted in Phase I oncology trials for identifying the maximum tolerated dose of therapeutics, its application in CHIM settings remains limited, particularly when the endpoint of interest is infection. This tutorial provides step-by-step guidance for implementing a Bayesian CRM in dose-finding CHIMs, using an oropharyngeal Neisseria gonorrhoeae challenge as a motivating case study. The framework outlines key design components, including dose-grid specification, dose-response model, prior elicitation, Bayesian updating, decision rules, and stopping criteria, with particular emphasis on a clinically interpretable parameterisation. Trial operating characteristics are evaluated through simulation studies under multiple dose-response scenarios and prior-predictive analyses, and compared with a commonly used '3+3' type rule-based design. This work highlights the advantages of Bayesian model-based designs for dose-finding in CHIMs over classic rule-based designs and provides a structured, reproducible framework for implementing CRM, supporting their application in future CHIM studies.

Matching journals

The top 12 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.9%
2
Clinical Trials
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
3
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 6%
5.5%
4
Statistics in Medicine
40 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
5
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
6
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
187 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.1%
7
Annals of Internal Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
8
The Lancet Microbe
44 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.8%
9
Value in Health
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.7%
10
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 8%
2.5%
11
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.5%
12
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 41%
2.4%
50% of probability mass above
13
BMC Infectious Diseases
133 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
14
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.9%
15
Trials
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
16
American Journal of Epidemiology
67 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
17
Mathematical Biosciences
49 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
18
Medical Decision Making
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
19
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
20
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
142 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
21
Clinical Infectious Diseases
235 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
22
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.1%
23
Frontiers in Pharmacology
111 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
24
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
25
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
26
Pharmaceutics
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
27
Epidemiology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
28
Annals of Translational Medicine
18 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
29
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
30
Frontiers in Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%