Literature DB >> 11355958

Relationships between drug activity in NCI preclinical in vitro and in vivo models and early clinical trials.

J I Johnson1, S Decker, D Zaharevitz, L V Rubinstein, J M Venditti, S Schepartz, S Kalyandrug, M Christian, S Arbuck, M Hollingshead, E A Sausville.   

Abstract

An analysis of the activity of compounds tested in pre-clinical in vivo and in vitro assays by the National Cancer Institute's Developmental Therapeutics Program was performed. For 39 agents with both xenograft data and Phase II clinical trials results available, in vivo activity in a particular histology in a tumour model did not closely correlate with activity in the same human cancer histology, casting doubt on the correspondence of the pre-clinical models to clinical results. However, for compounds with in vivo activity in at least one-third of tested xenograft models, there was correlation with ultimate activity in at least some Phase II trials. Thus, an efficient means of predicting activity in vivo models remains desirable for compounds with anti-proliferative activity in vitro. For 564 compounds tested in the hollow fibre assay which were also tested against in vivo tumour models, the likelihood of finding xenograft activity in at least one-third of the in vivo models tested rose with increasing intraperitoneal hollow fibre activity, from 8% for all compounds tested to 20% in agents with evidence of response in more than 6 intraperitoneal fibres (P< 0.0001). Intraperitoneal hollow fibre activity was also found to be a better predictor of xenograft activity than either subcutaneous hollow fibre activity or intraperitoneal plus subcutaneous activity combined. Since hollow fibre activity was a useful indicator of potential in vivo response, correlates with hollow fibre activity were examined for 2304 compounds tested in both the NCI 60 cell line in vitro cancer drug screen and hollow fibre assay. A positive correlation was found for histologic selectivity between in vitro and hollow fibre responses. The most striking correlation was between potency in the 60 cell line screen and hollow fibre activity; 56% of compounds with mean 50% growth inhibition below 10(-7.5) M were active in more than 6 intraperitoneal fibres whereas only 4% of compounds with a potency of 10(-4) M achieved the same level of hollow fibre activity (P< 0.0001). Structural parameters of the drugs analysed included compound molecular weight and hydrogen-bonding factors, both of which were found to be predictive of hollow fibre activity. Copyright 2001 Cancer Research Campaign.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11355958      PMCID: PMC2363645          DOI: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1796

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  11 in total

Review 1.  Evolving approaches to cancer drug discovery and development at the National Cancer Institute, USA.

Authors:  E A Sausville; E Feigal
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 32.976

2.  Feasibility of drug screening with panels of human tumor cell lines using a microculture tetrazolium assay.

Authors:  M C Alley; D A Scudiero; A Monks; M L Hursey; M J Czerwinski; D L Fine; B J Abbott; J G Mayo; R H Shoemaker; M R Boyd
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1988-02-01       Impact factor: 12.701

3.  A knowledge-based approach in designing combinatorial or medicinal chemistry libraries for drug discovery. 1. A qualitative and quantitative characterization of known drug databases.

Authors:  A K Ghose; V N Viswanadhan; J J Wendoloski
Journal:  J Comb Chem       Date:  1999-01

4.  History of the Cancer Chemotherapy Program.

Authors: 
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Rep       Date:  1966-10

Review 5.  Current NCI preclinical antitumor screening in vivo: results of tumor panel screening, 1976-1982, and future directions.

Authors:  J M Venditti; R A Wesley; J Plowman
Journal:  Adv Pharmacol Chemother       Date:  1984

6.  Preclinical drug development: rationale and methods.

Authors:  J M Venditti
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 4.929

7.  Display and analysis of patterns of differential activity of drugs against human tumor cell lines: development of mean graph and COMPARE algorithm.

Authors:  K D Paull; R H Shoemaker; L Hodes; A Monks; D A Scudiero; L Rubinstein; J Plowman; M R Boyd
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1989-07-19       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Feasibility of a high-flux anticancer drug screen using a diverse panel of cultured human tumor cell lines.

Authors:  A Monks; D Scudiero; P Skehan; R Shoemaker; K Paull; D Vistica; C Hose; J Langley; P Cronise; A Vaigro-Wolff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1991-06-05       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Correlation of drug response in patients and in the clonogenic assay with solid human tumour xenografts.

Authors:  C C Scholz; D P Berger; B R Winterhalter; H Henss; H H Fiebig
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 9.162

10.  Angiogenesis in the hollow fiber tumor model influences drug delivery to tumor cells: implications for anticancer drug screening programs.

Authors:  R M Phillips; J Pearce; P M Loadman; M C Bibby; P A Cooper; D J Swaine; J A Double
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1998-12-01       Impact factor: 12.701

View more
  294 in total

Review 1.  Best practices in cancer nanotechnology: perspective from NCI nanotechnology alliance.

Authors:  William C Zamboni; Vladimir Torchilin; Anil K Patri; Jeff Hrkach; Stephen Stern; Robert Lee; Andre Nel; Nicholas J Panaro; Piotr Grodzinski
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 12.531

2.  National Cancer Institute pediatric preclinical testing program: model description for in vitro cytotoxicity testing.

Authors:  Min H Kang; Malcolm A Smith; Christopher L Morton; Nino Keshelava; Peter J Houghton; C Patrick Reynolds
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 3.167

3.  Maximizing tumour exposure to anti-neuropilin-1 antibody requires saturation of non-tumour tissue antigenic sinks in mice.

Authors:  Daniela Bumbaca; Hong Xiang; C Andrew Boswell; Ruediger E Port; Shannon L Stainton; Eduardo E Mundo; Sheila Ulufatu; Anil Bagri; Frank-Peter Theil; Paul J Fielder; Leslie A Khawli; Ben-Quan Shen
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 8.739

Review 4.  Preclinical strategies to define predictive biomarkers for therapeutically relevant cancer subtypes.

Authors:  Marina Pajic; Christopher J Scarlett; David K Chang; Robert L Sutherland; Andrew V Biankin
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2011-04-23       Impact factor: 4.132

5.  Balancing safety, effectiveness, and public desire: the FDA and cancer.

Authors:  Rena Conti
Journal:  Issue Brief (Commonw Fund)       Date:  2003-04

Review 6.  Nitric oxide and cancer therapy: the emperor has NO clothes.

Authors:  Jason R Hickok; Douglas D Thomas
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.116

7.  Predictors for establishing recommended phase 2 doses: analysis of 320 dose-seeking oncology phase 1 trials.

Authors:  Nicolas Penel; Alain Duhamel; Antoine Adenis; Patrick Devos; Nicolas Isambert; Stéphanie Clisant; Jacques Bonneterre
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 3.850

Review 8.  Preclinical development of molecular-targeted agents for cancer.

Authors:  Alberto Ocana; Atanasio Pandiella; Lillian L Siu; Ian F Tannock
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 9.  Re-adapting T cells for cancer therapy: from mouse models to clinical trials.

Authors:  Ingunn M Stromnes; Thomas M Schmitt; Aude G Chapuis; Sunil R Hingorani; Philip D Greenberg
Journal:  Immunol Rev       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 12.988

Review 10.  Development of Preclinical Models to Understand and Treat Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Judith S Sebolt-Leopold
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2018-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.