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 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.