Literature DB >> 10698472

Perspectives on surrogate end points in the development of drugs that reduce the risk of cancer.

G J Kelloff1, C C Sigman, K M Johnson, C W Boone, P Greenwald, J A Crowell, E T Hawk, L A Doody.   

Abstract

This paper proposes a scientific basis and possible strategy for applying surrogate end points in chemopreventive drug development. The potential surrogate end points for cancer incidence described are both phenotypic (at the tissue, cellular, and molecular levels) and genotypic biomarkers. To establish chemopreventive efficacy in randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials, it is expected that in most cases it will be critical to ensure that virtually all of the biomarker lesions are prevented or that the lesions prevented are those with the potential to progress. This would require that both the phenotype and genotype of the target tissue in agent-treated subjects, especially in any new or remaining precancers, are equivalent to or show less progression than those of placebo-treated subjects. In the National Cancer Institute chemoprevention program, histological modulation of a precancer (intraepithelial neoplasia) has thus far been the primary phenotypic surrogate end point in chemoprevention trials. Additionally, we give high priority to biomarkers measuring specific and general genotypic changes correlating to the carcinogenesis progression model for the targeted cancer (e.g., progressive genomic instability as measured by loss of heterozygosity or amplification at a specific microsatellite loci). Other potential surrogate end points that may occur earlier in carcinogenesis are being analyzed in these precancers and in nearby normal appearing tissues. These biomarkers include proliferation and differentiation indices, specific gene and general chromosome damage, cell growth regulatory molecules, and biochemical activities (e.g., enzyme inhibition). Serum biomarkers also may be monitored (e.g., prostate-specific antigen) because of their accessibility. Potentially chemopreventive drug effects of the test agent also may be measured (e.g., tissue and serum estrogen levels in studies of steroid aromatase inhibitors). These initial studies are expected to expand the list of validated surrogate end points for future use. Continued discussion and research among the National Cancer Institute, the Food and Drug Administration, industry, and academia are needed to ensure that surrogate end point-based chemoprevention indications are feasible.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10698472

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  17 in total

Review 1.  Biomarkers as surrogates for cancer development.

Authors:  E Hawk; J L Viner; J A Lawrence
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 2.  Cancer chemoprevention.

Authors:  Peter Greenwald
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-03-23

Review 3.  Studies of apoptosis in breast cancer.

Authors:  M Parton; M Dowsett; I Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-06-23

Review 4.  High grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a disease.

Authors:  M S Steiner
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Randomized phase II trial of lyophilized strawberries in patients with dysplastic precancerous lesions of the esophagus.

Authors:  Tong Chen; Fei Yan; Jiaming Qian; Mingzhou Guo; Hongbing Zhang; Xiaofei Tang; Fang Chen; Gary D Stoner; Xiaomin Wang
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2011-12-01

Review 6.  Dietary agents in cancer prevention: an immunological perspective.

Authors:  Ya Ying Zheng; Bharathi Viswanathan; Pravin Kesarwani; Shikhar Mehrotra
Journal:  Photochem Photobiol       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 3.421

7.  Regulatory approval of cancer risk-reducing (chemopreventive) drugs: moving what we have learned into the clinic.

Authors:  Frank L Meyskens; Gregory A Curt; Dean E Brenner; Gary Gordon; Ronald B Herberman; Olivera Finn; Gary J Kelloff; Samir N Khleif; Caroline C Sigman; Eva Szabo
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2011-03

8.  Resveratrol derivatives as promising chemopreventive agents with improved potency and selectivity.

Authors:  Tamara P Kondratyuk; Eun-Jung Park; Laura E Marler; Soyoun Ahn; Yang Yuan; Yongsoo Choi; Rui Yu; Richard B van Breemen; Bin Sun; Juma Hoshino; Mark Cushman; Katherine C Jermihov; Andrew D Mesecar; Clinton J Grubbs; John M Pezzuto
Journal:  Mol Nutr Food Res       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 5.914

9.  Chemoprevention strategies in the prostate: an overview.

Authors:  Gary J Kelloff; Howard R Higley; Michael K Brawer; M Scott Lucia; Caroline C Sigman; E David Crawford
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2002

Review 10.  High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and prostate cancer risk reduction.

Authors:  Mitchell S Steiner
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2003-02-21       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.