Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Dose-Response Relationship: Selectivity and Specificity01:25

Dose-Response Relationship: Selectivity and Specificity

Drugs exert their therapeutic effects by interacting with receptors, enzymes, or ion channels that are present throughout the human body. The strength and duration of the interaction between a drug and its target receptor are characterized by the selectivity and specificity of the drug. Selectivity refers to a drug's strong preference for its intended target over other targets. For instance, isoprenaline, a non-selective β-adrenergic agonist, interacts with both β1- and β2-adrenergic receptors...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Dose Response Curve: Conventional Versus Nonmonotonic01:21

Dose Response Curve: Conventional Versus Nonmonotonic

The correlation between a drug's dosage and its impact on a biological system is a cornerstone of pharmacology and toxicology. Conventional dose–response curves, which include graded and quantal relationships, are key to this understanding. Graded dose–response curves depict the spectrum of a biological reaction to different doses within an individual, indicating that as the drug dosage increases, so does the intensity of the response. On the other hand, quantal dose–response relationships...
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection01:05

Difference from Background: Limit of Detection

The limit of detection (LOD) is the smallest amount of analyte that can be distinguished from the background noise. The LOD value corresponds to the concentration at which the analyte signal is three times larger than the standard deviation of the blank signal. Below this value, the analyte signal cannot be differentiated from the background noise. It is calculated by dividing the calibration slope by 3 times the standard deviation of the blank signals.
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Innovative Clinical Trial Approach for Evaluating Digital Medical Devices Under European Fast-Track Regulatory Frameworks.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same author

Use of roster charts in the investigation and prosecution of nurses suspected of inflicting deliberate harm on patients.

Medicine, science, and the law·2025
Same author

In Silico Clinical Trials in Drug Development: A Systematic Review.

Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science·2025
Same author

Digital pharmacological twins: Bridging multi-scale modelling and artificial intelligence for precision medicine: The DIGPHAT consortium.

Therapie·2025
Same author

Modeling Whole-Body Dynamic PET Microdosing Data to Predict the Whole-Body Pharmacokinetics of Glyburide in Humans.

Clinical pharmacokinetics·2025
Same author

Gut feelings and the conviction of nurse Lucy Letby.

Nurse education in practice·2025
Same journal

The sequential cohort randomized clinical trial: A study design for community-engaged clinical research in a rural American Indian community.

Contemporary clinical trials·2026
Same journal

Rationale, design, and statistical analysis plan for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of Limosilactobacillus reuteri to support mother-infant bonding and maternal socioemotional functioning in postpartum women at increased risk for postpartum depression.

Contemporary clinical trials·2026
Same journal

Effectiveness of clinical trial recruitment strategies in a safety-net hospital.

Contemporary clinical trials·2026
Same journal

Are older adult research participants representative of the general population? Results from 19 clinical studies at one academic research center.

Contemporary clinical trials·2026
Same journal

Multi-site feasibility of a web-based and telephone navigation intervention to connect lung cancer caregivers in community oncology settings with resources: Protocol for the WF-2301CD Caregiver Oncology Needs Evaluation Tool (CONNECT) trial.

Contemporary clinical trials·2026
Same journal

Rationale and design of a CArdiac rehabilitation program on the prevention of CardioTOXicity in breast Cancer patients undergoing treatment with anthracyclines and/or trastuzumab (CARPTOX-BC) trial: A randomized, active control group, open-label trial.

Contemporary clinical trials·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 21, 2026

Characterization of Recombination Effects in a Liquid Ionization Chamber Used for the Dosimetry of a Radiosurgical Accelerator
07:31

Characterization of Recombination Effects in a Liquid Ionization Chamber Used for the Dosimetry of a Radiosurgical Accelerator

Published on: May 9, 2014

Sensitivity of dose-finding studies to observation errors.

Sarah Zohar1, John O'Quigley

  • 1Inserm CIC 9504, Centre d'Investigations Cliniques, Hôpital Saint-Louis, 75010 Paris, France. sarah.zohar@univ-paris-diderot.fr

Contemporary Clinical Trials
|July 8, 2009
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Recording errors in dose-finding studies can significantly impact clinical trial outcomes. The standard '3+3' design is particularly sensitive to errors where non-toxicities are misclassified as toxicities, potentially leading to trial failure.

More Related Videos

Expedited Radiation Biodosimetry by Automated Dicentric Chromosome Identification (ADCI) and Dose Estimation
10:33

Expedited Radiation Biodosimetry by Automated Dicentric Chromosome Identification (ADCI) and Dose Estimation

Published on: September 4, 2017

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage (40-300 kV) X-Ray Facilities
06:51

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage (40-300 kV) X-Ray Facilities

Published on: February 20, 2021

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 21, 2026

Characterization of Recombination Effects in a Liquid Ionization Chamber Used for the Dosimetry of a Radiosurgical Accelerator
07:31

Characterization of Recombination Effects in a Liquid Ionization Chamber Used for the Dosimetry of a Radiosurgical Accelerator

Published on: May 9, 2014

Expedited Radiation Biodosimetry by Automated Dicentric Chromosome Identification (ADCI) and Dose Estimation
10:33

Expedited Radiation Biodosimetry by Automated Dicentric Chromosome Identification (ADCI) and Dose Estimation

Published on: September 4, 2017

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage (40-300 kV) X-Ray Facilities
06:51

Dosimetry for Cell Irradiation using Orthovoltage (40-300 kV) X-Ray Facilities

Published on: February 20, 2021

Area of Science:

  • Clinical pharmacology
  • Biostatistics
  • Drug development

Background:

  • Phase I clinical trials aim to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) while minimizing patient exposure to overly toxic doses.
  • Accurate toxicity recording is crucial for reliable dose-finding, but errors can occur, influencing trial outcomes.
  • Existing dose-finding designs need evaluation for their sensitivity to such recording inaccuracies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the sensitivity of common dose-finding designs to recording and observation errors.
  • To compare the impact of different types of recording errors (e.g., undetected toxicities, misclassified non-toxicities) on trial conclusions.
  • To assess the robustness of the standard '3+3' design, grouped up-and-down design, and continual reassessment method (CRM) to data inaccuracies.

Main Methods:

  • Simulation studies were conducted to evaluate three dose-finding designs: the standard '3+3', grouped up-and-down, and CRM.
  • The impact of errors of the first kind (non-toxicity recorded as toxicity) and errors of the second kind (toxicity recorded as non-toxicity) was analyzed.
  • Sensitivity analyses were performed to quantify the influence of these errors on MTD estimation and trial recommendations.

Main Results:

  • Errors in recording toxicity data significantly influence dose-finding conclusions.
  • Errors of the first kind generally have a greater impact than errors of the second kind.
  • The standard '3+3' design demonstrated particular sensitivity to errors of the second kind, where toxicities are missed.

Conclusions:

  • Recording inaccuracies pose a substantial risk in Phase I dose-finding studies.
  • The '3+3' design's sensitivity to missed toxicities could lead to inadequate dosing in later trial phases.
  • Careful data recording and potentially more robust designs are needed to mitigate the risk of trial failure due to recording errors.