Literature DB >> 1464163

Choice of starting dose and escalation for phase I studies of antitumor agents.

J S Penta1, G L Rosner, D L Trump.   

Abstract

The standard approaches to initial dose selection and dose escalation in phase I trials may be inappropriately conservative. These approaches mandate accrual of large numbers of patients, most of whom are treated at low and potentially ineffective doses. We compared the clinically determined maximum tolerable dose (MTD) with the starting dose of 45 drugs that had undergone phase I studies during the period 1977-1989. We also examined the number of dose-escalation steps required to achieve the MTD in relation to nonhematologic and hematologic dose-limiting toxicity. The median ratio of MTD to starting dose for all drugs was 20 (range, < 1-433) and the median number of dose levels studied to reach the MTD was 8 (range, 0-23). For drugs with nonhematologic dose-limiting toxicity, the median ratio of MTD to starting dose was 30 (range, 3-385) as compared with 12.8 (range, < 1-433) for those with hematologic dose-limiting toxicity (P = 0.023). The median number of dose-escalation steps required to reach the MTD was 9 (range, 2-18) for drugs with nonhematologic dose-limiting toxicity as compared with 5.5 (range, 0-23) for those with hematologic dose-limiting toxicity (P = 0.038). We also examined the response rate for 1,110 patients treated with 21 phase-I-study drugs for which response information was available. Responses were reported for 29 patients (2.6%). Among the 476 patients treated at the 3 highest dose steps, 17 responded (3.6%), which is double the response rate obtained at the lower doses (P = 0.08). It is suggested that although the usual methods for choosing starting doses and dose-escalation schemes for phase I studies are safe, they are overly conservative and delay opportunities for therapeutic benefit in phase I and subsequent phase II trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1464163     DOI: 10.1007/bf00685555

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol        ISSN: 0344-5704            Impact factor:   3.333


  10 in total

1.  Mouse and large-animal toxicology studies of twelve antitumor agents: relevance to starting dose for phase I clinical trials.

Authors:  J S Penta; M Rozencweig; A M Guarino; F M Muggia
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 3.333

2.  Pharmacologically guided phase I clinical trials based upon preclinical drug development.

Authors:  J M Collins; C K Grieshaber; B A Chabner
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1990-08-15       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Pharmacology and clinical toxicity of 4'-iodo-4'-deoxydoxorubicin: an example of successful application of pharmacokinetics to dose escalation in phase I trials.

Authors:  L Gianni; L Viganò; A Surbone; D Ballinari; P Casali; C Tarella; J M Collins; G Bonadonna
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1990-03-21       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Pharmacokinetically guided dose escalation in phase I clinical trials. Commentary and proposed guidelines. EORTC Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol       Date:  1987-07

5.  Procedures for preclinical toxicologic evaluation of cancer chemotherapeutic agents: protocols of the laboratory of toxicology.

Authors:  D J Prieur; D M Young; R D Davis; D A Cooney; E R Homan; R L Dixon; A M Guarino
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Rep 3       Date:  1973-01

6.  Quantitative prediction of drug toxicity in humans from toxicology in small and large animals.

Authors:  M A Goldsmith; M Slavik; S K Carter
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1975-05       Impact factor: 12.701

7.  Adequacies and inadequacies in assessing murine toxicity data with antineoplastic agents.

Authors:  A M Guarino; M Rozencweig; I Kline; J S Penta; J M Venditti; H H Lloyd; D A Holzworth; F M Muggia
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1979-06       Impact factor: 12.701

8.  Animal toxicology for early clinical trials with anticancer agents.

Authors:  M Rozencweig; D D Von Hoff; M J Staquet; P S Schein; J S Penta; A Goldin; F M Muggia; E J Freireich; V T DeVita
Journal:  Cancer Clin Trials       Date:  1981

9.  Response rates, duration of response, and dose response effects in phase I studies of antineoplastics.

Authors:  D D Von Hoff; J Turner
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 3.850

10.  Potential roles for preclinical pharmacology in phase I clinical trials.

Authors:  J M Collins; D S Zaharko; R L Dedrick; B A Chabner
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rep       Date:  1986-01
  10 in total
  10 in total

1.  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

2.  Justification of the starting dose as the main determinant of accrual time in dose-seeking oncology phase 1 trials.

Authors:  Nicolas Penel; Pierre Leblond; Amélie Lansiaux; Stéphanie Clisant; Eric Dansin; Antoine Adenis; Jacques Bonneterre
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2009-09-16       Impact factor: 3.850

3.  Pharmacodynamic analysis of hematologic profiles.

Authors:  G L Rosner; P Müller
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1994-12

4.  Therapeutic response and potential pitfalls in phase I clinical trials of anticancer agents conducted in Japan.

Authors:  K Itoh; Y Sasaki; Y Miyata; H Fujii; T Ohtsu; H Wakita; T Igarashi; K Abe
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.333

Review 5.  Starting dose selection and dose escalation for oncology small molecule first-in-patient trials: learnings from a survey of FDA-approved drugs.

Authors:  Rajendar K Mittapalli; Donghua Yin; Darrin Beaupre; Rameshraja Palaparthy
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 3.333

6.  Theoretical and practical application of traditional and accelerated titration Phase I clinical trial designs: the Wayne State University experience.

Authors:  Elisabeth I Heath; Patricia M LoRusso; S Percy Ivy; Larry Rubinstein; Michaele C Christian; Lance K Heilbrun
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.051

7.  Dose-levels and first signs of efficacy in contemporary oncology phase 1 clinical trials.

Authors:  Charles Ferte; Jean-Charles Soria; Nicolas Penel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Patients in phase I trials of anti-cancer agents in Japan: motivation, comprehension and expectations.

Authors:  K Itoh; Y Sasaki; H Fujii; T Ohtsu; H Wakita; T Igarashi; K Abe
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Evaluation of rodent-only toxicology for early clinical trials with novel cancer therapeutics.

Authors:  D R Newell; S S Burtles; B W Fox; D I Jodrell; T A Connors
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Do all patients in the phase I oncology trials need to be hospitalized? Domestic but outstanding issues for globalization of drug development in Japan.

Authors:  Akihiko Shimomura; Shunsuke Kondo; Noriko Kobayashi; Satoru Iwasa; Shigehisa Kitano; Kenji Tamura; Yutaka Fujiwara; Noboru Yamamoto
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 3.402

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.