Literature DB >> 19756372

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

Nicolas Penel1, Pierre Leblond, Amélie Lansiaux, Stéphanie Clisant, Eric Dansin, Antoine Adenis, Jacques Bonneterre.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: New drug development is a time- and resource-consuming process. Phase 1 trials constitute a major key-step of this development. Shortening the accrual time is of major importance.
METHODS: 292 published phase-1-trials were retrospectively reviewed to establish the determinants of accrual time using Log-rank test and then Cox Model.
RESULTS: Out of 292 trials (1997-2008), only 107 reports (36%) described the accrual time (median: 20 months, 5-72). Phase-2-recommended dose was established in 87 studies (81%). Most studies investigated regimens including cytotoxic drugs (77%) or molecular targeted therapies (29%). Under univariate analysis, two parameters shortened the accrual time: studies conducted in USA vs. other places (19 vs. 21 months p = 0.03) and regimen with more than 2 dose-escalated drugs (13 vs. 21 months, p = 0.003). One parameter was significantly associated with longer accrual time: starting dose justified by animal toxicology data vs. previous clinical trials (22 vs. 19 months, p = 0.03). Most of parameters did not significantly affect the accrual time: nature of investigated drugs, duration of treatment cycle, phase 1 dedicated to specific tumoral subtypes, number of centers, method of drug escalation (classical 3+3 vs. accelerated titration design), type of increment (modified Fibonacci method vs. others) and presence of expansion of cohort at the phase-II-recommended dose. Cox model analysis retained one determinant: starting dose justified by animal toxicology data: HR = 2.00 [1.45-5.20], p = 0.047.
CONCLUSION: Few parameters influence the accrual time of dose-escalation phase-1 trials. Real first-in-man phase 1 studies based on starting dose estimated from animal toxicological data require longer accrual time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19756372     DOI: 10.1007/s10637-009-9317-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest New Drugs        ISSN: 0167-6997            Impact factor:   3.850


  18 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

Review 2.  Choice of starting dose and escalation for phase I studies of antitumor agents.

Authors:  J S Penta; G L Rosner; D L Trump
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 3.333

3.  Prognostic factors among cancer patients with good performance status screened for phase I trials.

Authors:  Nicolas Penel; Marie Vanseymortier; Marie-Edith Bonneterre; Stéphanie Clisant; Eric Dansin; Yvette Vendel; Régis Beuscart; Jacques Bonneterre
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2007-09-22       Impact factor: 3.850

4.  'No risk, no fun': challenges for the oncology phase I clinical trial time-performance.

Authors:  Jaap Verweij
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 9.162

5.  Publication biases and phase II trials investigating anticancer targeted therapies.

Authors:  Nicolas Penel; Antoine Adenis
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2008-10-18       Impact factor: 3.850

Review 6.  Phase I trial design: are new methodologies being put into practice?

Authors:  S F Dent; E A Eisenhauer
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 32.976

Review 7.  Phase I clinical trials: adapting methodology to face new challenges.

Authors:  D J Kerr
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 32.976

8.  On the nature and ethics of phase I clinical trials of cancer chemotherapies.

Authors:  M B Lipsett
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1982-08-27       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002.

Authors:  Elizabeth Horstmann; Mary S McCabe; Louise Grochow; Seiichiro Yamamoto; Larry Rubinstein; Troy Budd; Dale Shoemaker; Ezekiel J Emanuel; Christine Grady
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-03-03       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Multi-institutional phase I trials of anticancer agents.

Authors:  Afshin Dowlati; Sudhir Manda; Joseph Gibbons; Scot C Remick; Lauren Patrick; Pingfu Fu
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-04-20       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  2 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.  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

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.