Literature DB >> 14512401

The phase III trial in the era of targeted therapy: unraveling the "go or no go" decision.

Thomas G Roberts1, Thomas J Lynch, Bruce A Chabner.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To review characteristics of contemporary phase III oncology trials and create an explicit framework to help clinical researchers prioritize novel therapies for phase III testing.
METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for all reviews of phase III trials; cataloged all phase III trials in two national clinical trial databases; and reviewed approval criteria of recently approved oncology drugs from public data provided by the US Food and Drug Administration. Industry data not available elsewhere in the medical literature were obtained from a sourcebook published by a large contract research organization.
RESULTS: Phase III oncology trials are the most expensive and time-consuming aspect of the drug development process. The results of these trials continue to exert the greatest influence on the treatment decision of oncologists and remain pivotal to the granting of drug approval. Making optimal decisions about which agents to advance to phase III testing may decrease the overall cost of cancer drug development and limit the number of patients exposed to ineffective drugs. A conceptual decision model for prioritizing novel therapies for phase III testing is presented.
CONCLUSION: Cancer drug development has become more complex and expensive, whereas overall clinical progress remains slow. The transition from phase II to phase III requires a strategic decision that is based on new considerations. A greater investment in phase I and II drug trials may be required to provide the information necessary for phase III planning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14512401     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.01.204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  21 in total

1.  Tumor status at 12 weeks predicts survival in advanced colorectal cancer: findings from NCCTG N9741.

Authors:  James M Heun; Axel Grothey; Megan E Branda; Richard M Goldberg; Daniel J Sargent
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2011-05-31

2.  Shortcomings in the clinical evaluation of new drugs: acute myeloid leukemia as paradigm.

Authors:  Roland B Walter; Frederick R Appelbaum; Martin S Tallman; Noel S Weiss; Richard A Larson; Elihu H Estey
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 3.  Molecular prescreening to select patient population in early clinical trials.

Authors:  Jordi Rodón; Cristina Saura; Rodrigo Dienstmann; Ana Vivancos; Santiago Ramón y Cajal; José Baselga; Josep Tabernero
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 4.  Hurdles in anticancer drug development from a regulatory perspective.

Authors:  Bertil Jonsson; Jonas Bergh
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Setting the bar in phase II trials: the use of historical data for determining "go/no go" decision for definitive phase III testing.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Vennus Ballen; Howard I Scher
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2007-02-02       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  A Primer on RECIST 1.1 for Oncologic Imaging in Clinical Drug Trials.

Authors:  Kathleen Ruchalski; Marta Braschi-Amirfarzan; Michael Douek; Victor Sai; Antonio Gutierrez; Rohit Dewan; Jonathan Goldin
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2021-05

7.  Ethics, error, and initial trials of efficacy.

Authors:  Spencer Phillips Hey; Jonathan Kimmelman
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 17.956

8.  Applications for oncologic drugs: a descriptive analysis of the oncologic drugs advisory committee reviews.

Authors:  John K Chan; Tuyen K Kiet; Bradley J Monk; Nichole Young-Lin; Kevin Blansit; Daniel S Kapp; Idoroenyi Amanam
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2014-03-05

Review 9.  Phase 0 clinical trials: recommendations from the Task Force on Methodology for the Development of Innovative Cancer Therapies.

Authors:  Shivaani Kummar; James H Doroshow; Joseph E Tomaszewski; A Hilary Calvert; Marinus Lobbezoo; Giuseppe Giaccone
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 10.  The Comparative Oncology Trials Consortium: using spontaneously occurring cancers in dogs to inform the cancer drug development pathway.

Authors:  Ira Gordon; Melissa Paoloni; Christina Mazcko; Chand Khanna
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-10-13       Impact factor: 11.069

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.