Literature DB >> 18285603

Analysis of phase II studies on targeted agents and subsequent phase III trials: what are the predictors for success?

John K Chan1, Stefanie M Ueda, Valerie E Sugiyama, Christopher D Stave, Jacob Y Shin, Bradley J Monk, Branimir I Sikic, Kathryn Osann, Daniel S Kapp.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To identify the characteristics of phase II studies that predict for subsequent "positive" phase III trials (those that reached the proposed primary end points of study or those wherein the study drug was superior to the standard regimen investigating targeted agents in advanced tumors.
METHODS: We identified all phase III clinical trials of targeted therapies against advanced cancers published from 1985 to 2005. Characteristics of the preceding phase II studies were reviewed to identify predictive factors for success of the subsequent phase III trial. Data were analyzed using the chi(2) test and logistic regression models.
RESULTS: Of 351 phase II studies, 167 (47.6%) subsequent phase III trials were positive and 184 (52.4%) negative. Phase II studies from multiple rather than single institutions were more likely to precede a successful trial (60.4% v 39.4%; P < .001). Positive phase II results were more likely to lead to a successful phase III trial (50.8% v 22.5%; P = .003). The percentage of successful trials from pharmaceutical companies was significantly higher compared with academic, cooperative groups, and research institutes (89.5% v 44.2%, 45.2%, and 46.3%, respectively; P = .002). On multivariate analysis, these factors and shorter time interval between publication of phase II results and III study publication were independent predictive factors for a positive phase III trial.
CONCLUSION: In phase II studies of targeted agents, multiple- versus single-institution participation, positive phase II trial, pharmaceutical company-based trials, and shorter time period between publication of phase II to phase III trial were independent predictive factors of success in a phase III trial. Investigators should be cognizant of these factors in phase II studies before designing phase III trials.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18285603     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.8874

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


  20 in total

1.  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

2.  Predictors of Success of Phase II Pediatric Oncology Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Laura Franshaw; Maria Tsoli; Jennifer Byrne; Chelsea Mayoh; Siva Sivarajasingam; Murray Norris; Glenn M Marshall; David S Ziegler
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-02-26

3.  Sequential design of phase II-III cancer trials.

Authors:  Tze Leung Lai; Philip W Lavori; Mei-Chiung Shih
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 4.  Overcoming obstacles in the design of cancer anorexia/weight loss trials.

Authors:  Jennifer G Le-Rademacher; Jeffrey Crawford; William J Evans; Aminah Jatoi
Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol       Date:  2017-06-24       Impact factor: 6.312

5.  Immune recruitment and therapeutic synergy: keys to optimizing oncolytic viral therapy?

Authors:  Jay D Naik; Christopher J Twelves; Peter J Selby; Richard G Vile; John D Chester
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-05-16       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Comparison of error rates in single-arm versus randomized phase II cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Hui Tang; Nathan R Foster; Axel Grothey; Stephen M Ansell; Richard M Goldberg; Daniel J Sargent
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 7.  Future prospects of therapeutic clinical trials in acute myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  Maliha Khan; Armaghan-E-Rehman Mansoor; Tapan M Kadia
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2016-10-24       Impact factor: 3.404

Review 8.  Analysis of the yield of phase II combination therapy trials in medical oncology.

Authors:  Michael L Maitland; Christine Hudoba; Kelly L Snider; Mark J Ratain
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Validation of novel imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trial end-points.

Authors:  D J Sargent; L Rubinstein; L Schwartz; J E Dancey; C Gatsonis; L E Dodd; L K Shankar
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 9.162

10.  Assessing Similarity to Existing Drugs to Decide Whether to Continue Drug Development.

Authors:  Guoguang Julie Ma; Eric Chi; Joseph G Ibrahim; Robert A Parker
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 1.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.