PURPOSE: Although much is known about the safety of an anticancer agent at the time of initial marketing approval, sponsors customarily collect comprehensive safety data for studies that support supplemental indications. This adds significant cost and complexity to the study but may not provide useful new information. The main purpose of this analysis was to assess the amount of safety and concomitant medication data collected to determine a more optimal approach in the collection of these data when used in support of supplemental applications. METHODS: Following a prospectively developed statistical analysis plan, we reanalyzed safety data from eight previously completed prospective randomized trials. RESULTS: A total of 107,884 adverse events and 136,608 concomitant medication records were reviewed for the analysis. Of these, four grade 1 to 2 and nine grade 3 and higher events were identified as drug effects that were not included in the previously established safety profiles and could potentially have been missed using subsampling. These events were frequently detected in subsamples of 400 patients or larger. Furthermore, none of the concomitant medication records contributed to labeling changes for the supplemental indications. CONCLUSION: Our study found that applying the optimized methodologic approach, described herein, has a high probability of detecting new drug safety signals. Focusing data collection on signals that cause physicians to modify or discontinue treatment ensures that safety issues of the highest concern for patients and regulators are captured and has significant potential to relieve strain on the clinical trials system.
PURPOSE: Although much is known about the safety of an anticancer agent at the time of initial marketing approval, sponsors customarily collect comprehensive safety data for studies that support supplemental indications. This adds significant cost and complexity to the study but may not provide useful new information. The main purpose of this analysis was to assess the amount of safety and concomitant medication data collected to determine a more optimal approach in the collection of these data when used in support of supplemental applications. METHODS: Following a prospectively developed statistical analysis plan, we reanalyzed safety data from eight previously completed prospective randomized trials. RESULTS: A total of 107,884 adverse events and 136,608 concomitant medication records were reviewed for the analysis. Of these, four grade 1 to 2 and nine grade 3 and higher events were identified as drug effects that were not included in the previously established safety profiles and could potentially have been missed using subsampling. These events were frequently detected in subsamples of 400 patients or larger. Furthermore, none of the concomitant medication records contributed to labeling changes for the supplemental indications. CONCLUSION: Our study found that applying the optimized methodologic approach, described herein, has a high probability of detecting new drug safety signals. Focusing data collection on signals that cause physicians to modify or discontinue treatment ensures that safety issues of the highest concern for patients and regulators are captured and has significant potential to relieve strain on the clinical trials system.
Authors: Michelle R Mahoney; Daniel J Sargent; Michael J O'Connell; Richard M Goldberg; Paul Schaefer; Jan C Buckner Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-12-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D J Slamon; B Leyland-Jones; S Shak; H Fuchs; V Paton; A Bajamonde; T Fleming; W Eiermann; J Wolter; M Pegram; J Baselga; L Norton Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kathy D Miller; Linnea I Chap; Frankie A Holmes; Melody A Cobleigh; P Kelly Marcom; Louis Fehrenbacher; Maura Dickler; Beth A Overmoyer; James D Reimann; Amy P Sing; Virginia Langmuir; Hope S Rugo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Martine J Piccart-Gebhart; Marion Procter; Brian Leyland-Jones; Aron Goldhirsch; Michael Untch; Ian Smith; Luca Gianni; Jose Baselga; Richard Bell; Christian Jackisch; David Cameron; Mitch Dowsett; Carlos H Barrios; Günther Steger; Chiun-Shen Huang; Michael Andersson; Moshe Inbar; Mikhail Lichinitser; István Láng; Ulrike Nitz; Hiroji Iwata; Christoph Thomssen; Caroline Lohrisch; Thomas M Suter; Josef Rüschoff; Tamás Suto; Victoria Greatorex; Carol Ward; Carolyn Straehle; Eleanor McFadden; M Stella Dolci; Richard D Gelber Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-10-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Paul E Goss; James N Ingle; Silvana Martino; Nicholas J Robert; Hyman B Muss; Martine J Piccart; Monica Castiglione; Dongsheng Tu; Lois E Shepherd; Kathleen I Pritchard; Robert B Livingston; Nancy E Davidson; Larry Norton; Edith A Perez; Jeffrey S Abrams; Patrick Therasse; Michael J Palmer; Joseph L Pater Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-10-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nicholas J Vogelzang; James J Rusthoven; James Symanowski; Claude Denham; E Kaukel; Pierre Ruffie; Ulrich Gatzemeier; Michael Boyer; Salih Emri; Christian Manegold; Clet Niyikiza; Paolo Paoletti Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D Cunningham; S Pyrhönen; R D James; C J Punt; T F Hickish; R Heikkila; T B Johannesen; H Starkhammar; C A Topham; L Awad; C Jacques; P Herait Journal: Lancet Date: 1998-10-31 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: P Rougier; E Van Cutsem; E Bajetta; N Niederle; K Possinger; R Labianca; M Navarro; R Morant; H Bleiberg; J Wils; L Awad; P Herait; C Jacques Journal: Lancet Date: 1998-10-31 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Herbert Hurwitz; Louis Fehrenbacher; William Novotny; Thomas Cartwright; John Hainsworth; William Heim; Jordan Berlin; Ari Baron; Susan Griffing; Eric Holmgren; Napoleone Ferrara; Gwen Fyfe; Beth Rogers; Robert Ross; Fairooz Kabbinavar Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Marko Kavcic; Brian T Fisher; Yimei Li; Alix E Seif; Kari Torp; Dana M Walker; Yuan-Shung Huang; Grace E Lee; Sarah K Tasian; Marijana Vujkovic; Rochelle Bagatell; Richard Aplenc Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Alexia Iasonos; Mrinal Gounder; David R Spriggs; John F Gerecitano; David M Hyman; Sarah Zohar; John O'Quigley Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-07-23 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: R Aplenc; B T Fisher; Y S Huang; Y Li; T A Alonzo; R B Gerbing; M Hall; D Bertoch; R Keren; A E Seif; L Sung; P C Adamson; A Gamis Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Tamara P Miller; Yimei Li; Marko Kavcic; Andrea B Troxel; Yuan-Shun V Huang; Lillian Sung; Todd A Alonzo; Robert Gerbing; Matt Hall; Marla H Daves; Terzah M Horton; Michael A Pulsipher; Jessica A Pollard; Rochelle Bagatell; Alix E Seif; Brian T Fisher; Selina Luger; Alan S Gamis; Peter C Adamson; Richard Aplenc Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-02-16 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Mary Falcone; Chongliang Luo; Justin E Bekelman; Caryn Lerman; Yong Chen; David Birtwell; Martin Cheatle; Rui Duan; Peter E Gabriel; Lifang He; Emily M Ko; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Nebojsa Mirkovic; Danielle L Mowery; E Andrew Ochroch; E Carter Paulson; Emily Schriver; Robert A Schnoll Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-08-28 Impact factor: 4.254