Literature DB >> 21959287

Integrating predictive biomarkers and classifiers into oncology clinical development programmes.

Robert A Beckman1, Jason Clark, Cong Chen.   

Abstract

The future of drug development in oncology lies in identifying subsets of patients who will benefit from particular therapies, using predictive biomarkers. These technologies offer hope of enhancing the value of cancer medicines and reducing the size, cost and failure rates of clinical trials. However, examples of the failure of predictive biomarkers also exist. In these cases the use of biomarkers increased the costs, complexity and duration of clinical trials, and narrowed the treated population unnecessarily. Here, we present methods to adaptively integrate predictive biomarkers into clinical programmes in a data-driven manner, wherein these biomarkers are emphasized in exact proportion to the evidence supporting their clinical predictive value. The resulting programme demands value from predictive biomarkers and is designed to optimally harvest this value for oncology drug development.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21959287     DOI: 10.1038/nrd3550

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov        ISSN: 1474-1776            Impact factor:   84.694


  32 in total

1.  Adaptive, group sequential and decision theoretic approaches to sample size determination.

Authors:  Cyrus R Mehta; Nitin R Patel
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2006-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trials with hypotheses selection at interim: general concepts.

Authors:  Frank Bretz; Heinz Schmidli; Franz König; Amy Racine; Willi Maurer
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.207

3.  Cancer biomarkers--an invitation to the table.

Authors:  William S Dalton; Stephen H Friend
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-05-26       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Optimal cost-effective designs of Phase II proof of concept trials and associated go-no go decisions.

Authors:  Cong Chen; Robert A Beckman
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.051

Review 5.  The use of genomics in clinical trial design.

Authors:  Richard Simon
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers.

Authors:  Richard M Simon; Soonmyung Paik; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-10-08       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Astrid Lièvre; Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Delphine Le Corre; Valérie Boige; Bruno Landi; Jean-François Emile; Jean-François Côté; Gorana Tomasic; Christophe Penna; Michel Ducreux; Philippe Rougier; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Pierre Laurent-Puig
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2006-04-15       Impact factor: 12.701

8.  The cross-validated adaptive signature design.

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Wenyu Jiang; Richard Simon
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2010-01-12       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Rafael G Amado; Michael Wolf; Marc Peeters; Eric Van Cutsem; Salvatore Siena; Daniel J Freeman; Todd Juan; Robert Sikorski; Sid Suggs; Robert Radinsky; Scott D Patterson; David D Chang
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-03-03       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Sources of bias in specimens for research about molecular markers for cancer.

Authors:  David F Ransohoff; Margaret L Gourlay
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-12-28       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  25 in total

1.  Incorporating biomarkers into clinical trial designs: points to consider.

Authors:  Edward Bradley
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 2.  The risks of risk aversion in drug regulation.

Authors:  Hans-Georg Eichler; Brigitte Bloechl-Daum; Daniel Brasseur; Alasdair Breckenridge; Hubert Leufkens; June Raine; Tomas Salmonson; Christian K Schneider; Guido Rasi
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 3.  The placebo response in medicine: minimize, maximize or personalize?

Authors:  Paul Enck; Ulrike Bingel; Manfred Schedlowski; Winfried Rief
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 4.  Considerations for the successful co-development of targeted cancer therapies and companion diagnostics.

Authors:  Jane Fridlyand; Richard M Simon; Jessica C Walrath; Nancy Roach; Richard Buller; David P Schenkein; Keith T Flaherty; Jeff D Allen; Ellen V Sigal; Howard I Scher
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 84.694

5.  Impact of genetic dynamics and single-cell heterogeneity on development of nonstandard personalized medicine strategies for cancer.

Authors:  Robert A Beckman; Gunter S Schemmann; Chen-Hsiang Yeang
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-08-13       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Prospects and challenges for clinical decision support in the era of big data.

Authors:  Issam El Naqa; Michael R Kosorok; Judy Jin; Michelle Mierzwa; Randall K Ten Haken
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2018-11-09

Review 7.  Third-generation sequencing techniques and applications to drug discovery.

Authors:  Fatih Ozsolak
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Discov       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 6.098

Review 8.  Biomarker-Guided Non-Adaptive Trial Designs in Phase II and Phase III: A Methodological Review.

Authors:  Miranta Antoniou; Ruwanthi Kolamunnage-Dona; Andrea L Jorgensen
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2017-01-25

Review 9.  Personalized medicine and pharmacogenetic biomarkers: progress in molecular oncology testing.

Authors:  Frank S Ong; Kingshuk Das; Jay Wang; Hana Vakil; Jane Z Kuo; Wendell-Lamar B Blackwell; Stephen W Lim; Mark O Goodarzi; Kenneth E Bernstein; Jerome I Rotter; Wayne W Grody
Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 5.225

10.  Predictive biomarkers and companion diagnostics. The future of immunohistochemistry: "in situ proteomics," or just a "stain"?

Authors:  Clive R Taylor
Journal:  Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol       Date:  2014-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.