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.
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.
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of Bayesian networks, G-estimation and linear models to estimate causal treatment effects in aggregated N-of-1 trials 92%
- Prediction-powered Inference for Clinical Trials 91%
- External control arm analysis: an evaluation of propensity score approaches, G-computation, and doubly debiased machine learning 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Estimating Counterfactual Placebo HIV Incidence in HIV Prevention Trials Without Placebo Arms Based on Markers of HIV Exposure 93%
- Using simulated infectious disease outbreaks to guide the design of individually randomized vaccine trials 92%
- Dynamic methods for ongoing assessment of site-level risk in risk-based monitoring of clinical trials: a scoping review 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Stochastic Simulation-Based Approach to Inform Relapsing Mouse Model (RMM) Study Design for Non-Clinical Assessment of Tuberculosis 94%
- Evaluation of a Bayesian hierarchical pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model for predicting parasitological outcomes in Phase 2 studies of new antimalarial drugs 93%
- Model-Based Meta-Analysis of Relapsing Mouse Model Studies from the Critical Path to Tuberculosis Drug Regimens Initiative Database 92%
"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.