Literature DB >> 20837695

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

Michael L Maitland1, Christine Hudoba, Kelly L Snider, Mark J Ratain.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Phase II clinical studies screen for treatment regimens that improve patient care, but screening combination regimens is especially challenging. We hypothesized that recognized flaws of single-arm trials could be magnified in combination treatment studies, leading to many reported positive phase II trials but with a low fraction resulting in practice-changing phase III trials. EXPERIMENTAL
DESIGN: We searched medline and identified 363 combination chemotherapy clinical trials published in 2001 and 2002. Studies were rated as positive, negative, or inconclusive based on a standardized review of abstract and text. The Web of Science Index (Thomson Reuters, NY, NY) was searched for all articles published between January 2003 and October 2007 that cited at least one of these 363 published trials.
RESULTS: Of 363 published phase II combination chemotherapy trials, 262 (72%) were declared to be positive. Among 3,760 unique subsequent citing papers, 20 reported randomized phase III trials of the same combination in the same disease as the source paper, and 10 of these resulted in improved standards of care. Estimating from these data, the likelihood that a published, positive phase II combination chemotherapy trial will result in a subsequent trial showing an improvement in standard of care within five years was 0.038 (95% confidence interval, 0.016-0.064).
CONCLUSIONS: The contributory value of combination chemotherapy phase II trials done by 2001-2002 standards is low despite the participation of more than 16,000 subjects. Future phase II studies of combination regimens require better methods to screen for treatments most likely to improve standards of care. ©2010 AACR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20837695      PMCID: PMC2970723          DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-0669

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


  15 in total

1.  Current definitions of phases of investigation and the role of the FDA in the conduct of clinical trials.

Authors:  R Temple
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 4.749

2.  Comparison of outcomes of phase II studies and subsequent randomized control studies using identical chemotherapeutic regimens.

Authors:  Mohammad I Zia; Lillian L Siu; Greg R Pond; Eric X Chen
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 3.  Economics of new oncology drug development.

Authors:  Joseph A DiMasi; Henry G Grabowski
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Phase II trials published in 2002: a cross-specialty comparison showing significant design differences between oncology trials and other medical specialties.

Authors:  Laura C Michaelis; Mark J Ratain
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2007-04-15       Impact factor: 12.531

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

Authors:  John K Chan; Stefanie M Ueda; Valerie E Sugiyama; Christopher D Stave; Jacob Y Shin; Bradley J Monk; Branimir I Sikic; Kathryn Osann; Daniel S Kapp
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-19       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Optimising the design of phase II oncology trials: the importance of randomisation.

Authors:  Mark J Ratain; Daniel J Sargent
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 7.  Novel designs and end points for phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  Alex A Adjei; Michaele Christian; Percy Ivy
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2009-03-10       Impact factor: 12.531

8.  TRIBUTE: a phase III trial of erlotinib hydrochloride (OSI-774) combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Roy S Herbst; Diane Prager; Robert Hermann; Lou Fehrenbacher; Bruce E Johnson; Alan Sandler; Mark G Kris; Hai T Tran; Pam Klein; Xin Li; David Ramies; David H Johnson; Vincent A Miller
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-07-25       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 9.  Review of phase II trial designs used in studies of molecular targeted agents: outcomes and predictors of success in phase III.

Authors:  Robert H El-Maraghi; Elizabeth A Eisenhauer
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-19       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Gefitinib in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III trial--INTACT 2.

Authors:  Roy S Herbst; Giuseppe Giaccone; Joan H Schiller; Ronald B Natale; Vincent Miller; Christian Manegold; Giorgio Scagliotti; Rafael Rosell; Ira Oliff; James A Reeves; Michael K Wolf; Annetta D Krebs; Steven D Averbuch; Judith S Ochs; John Grous; Abderrahim Fandi; David H Johnson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-03-01       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  23 in total

1.  Bayesian adaptive randomized trial design for patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Authors:  Lorenzo Trippa; Eudocia Q Lee; Patrick Y Wen; Tracy T Batchelor; Timothy Cloughesy; Giovanni Parmigiani; Brian M Alexander
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Resampling phase III data to assess phase II trial designs and endpoints.

Authors:  Manish R Sharma; Theodore G Karrison; Yuyan Jin; Robert R Bies; Michael L Maitland; Walter M Stadler; Mark J Ratain
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 3.  Randomized phase II trials: a long-term investment with promising returns.

Authors:  Manish R Sharma; Walter M Stadler; Mark J Ratain
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-06-27       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Rethinking the metastatic cascade as a therapeutic target.

Authors:  Lida A Mina; George W Sledge
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-04-19       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Point/counterpoint: randomized versus single-arm phase II clinical trials for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Authors:  Stuart A Grossman; Karisa C Schreck; Karla Ballman; Brian Alexander
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 12.300

6.  Clinical trials in the era of personalized oncology.

Authors:  Michael L Maitland; Richard L Schilsky
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Cisplatin and etoposide versus carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: an analysis of Veterans Health Administration data.

Authors:  Rafael Santana-Davila; Kiran Devisetty; Aniko Szabo; Rodney Sparapani; Carlos Arce-Lara; Elizabeth M Gore; Amy Moran; Christina D Williams; Michael J Kelley; Jeffrey Whittle
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-11-24       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Serum C-Telopeptide Collagen Crosslinks and Plasma Soluble VEGFR2 as Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers in a Trial of Sequentially Administered Sunitinib and Cilengitide.

Authors:  Peter H O'Donnell; Sanja Karovic; Theodore G Karrison; Linda Janisch; Matthew R Levine; Pamela J Harris; Blase N Polite; Ezra E W Cohen; Gini F Fleming; Mark J Ratain; Michael L Maitland
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 9.  Small cell lung cancer (SCLC): no treatment advances in recent years.

Authors:  Filippos Koinis; Athanasios Kotsakis; Vasileios Georgoulias
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2016-02

Review 10.  The Role of Neoadjuvant Trials in Drug Development for Solid Tumors.

Authors:  Samuel A Funt; Paul B Chapman
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 12.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.