Literature DB >> 16299226

The progress and promise of molecular imaging probes in oncologic drug development.

Gary J Kelloff1, Kenneth A Krohn, Steven M Larson, Ralph Weissleder, David A Mankoff, John M Hoffman, Jeanne M Link, Kathryn Z Guyton, William C Eckelman, Howard I Scher, Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Bruce D Cheson, Caroline C Sigman, James L Tatum, George Q Mills, Daniel C Sullivan, Janet Woodcock.   

Abstract

As addressed by the recent Food and Drug Administration Critical Path Initiative, tools are urgently needed to increase the speed, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of drug development for cancer and other diseases. Molecular imaging probes developed based on recent scientific advances have great potential as oncologic drug development tools. Basic science studies using molecular imaging probes can help to identify and characterize disease-specific targets for oncologic drug therapy. Imaging end points, based on these disease-specific biomarkers, hold great promise to better define, stratify, and enrich study groups and to provide direct biological measures of response. Imaging-based biomarkers also have promise for speeding drug evaluation by supplementing or replacing preclinical and clinical pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluations, including target interaction and modulation. Such analyses may be particularly valuable in early comparative studies among candidates designed to interact with the same molecular target. Finally, as response biomarkers, imaging end points that characterize tumor vitality, growth, or apoptosis can also serve as early surrogates of therapy success. This article outlines the scientific basis of oncology imaging probes and presents examples of probes that could facilitate progress. The current regulatory opportunities for new and existing probe development and testing are also reviewed, with a focus on recent Food and Drug Administration guidance to facilitate early clinical development of promising probes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16299226     DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1302

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  70 in total

Review 1.  Using in-vivo fluorescence imaging in personalized cancer diagnostics and therapy, an image and treat paradigm.

Authors:  Y Ardeshirpour; V Chernomordik; J Capala; M Hassan; R Zielinsky; G Griffiths; S Achilefu; P Smith; A Gandjbakhche
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-12

2.  In-labeled KCCYSL peptide as an imaging probe for ErbB-2-expressing ovarian carcinomas.

Authors:  Susan L Deutscher; Said D Figueroa; Senthil R Kumar
Journal:  J Labelled Comp Radiopharm       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 1.921

Review 3.  Molecular imaging research in the outcomes era: measuring outcomes for individualized cancer therapy.

Authors:  David A Mankoff; Finbarr O'Sullivan; William E Barlow; Kenneth A Krohn
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  Imaging readouts as biomarkers or surrogate parameters for the assessment of therapeutic interventions.

Authors:  Markus Rudin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-03-06       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Integrated pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in drug development.

Authors:  Jasper Dingemanse; Silke Appel-Dingemanse
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.447

6.  Breast Cancer Treatment in the Era of Molecular Imaging.

Authors:  Gundula Edelhauser; Martin Funovics
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2008-12-17       Impact factor: 2.860

7.  Quantitative imaging for evaluation of response to cancer therapy.

Authors:  Laurence P Clarke; Barbara S Croft; Robert Nordstrom; Huiming Zhang; Gary Kelloff; J Tatum
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.243

8.  Molecular imaging of glucose uptake in oral neoplasia following topical application of fluorescently labeled deoxy-glucose.

Authors:  Nitin Nitin; Alicia L Carlson; Tim Muldoon; Adel K El-Naggar; Ann Gillenwater; Rebecca Richards-Kortum
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 7.396

9.  Automated tracking of quantitative assessments of tumor burden in clinical trials.

Authors:  Daniel L Rubin; Debra Willrett; Martin J O'Connor; Cleber Hage; Camille Kurtz; Dilvan A Moreira
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.243

10.  PET Imaging of Dll4 Expression in Glioblastoma and Colorectal Cancer Xenografts Using (64)Cu-Labeled Monoclonal Antibody 61B.

Authors:  Bin Zhou; Hui Wang; Ren Liu; Mengzhe Wang; Huaifu Deng; Benjamin C Giglio; Parkash S Gill; Hong Shan; Zibo Li
Journal:  Mol Pharm       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 4.939

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.