Literature DB >> 22397801

Clinical trial designs for testing biomarker-based personalized therapies.

Tze Leung Lai1, Philip W Lavori, Mei-Chiung I Shih, Branimir I Sikic.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Advances in molecular therapeutics in the past decade have opened up new possibilities for treating cancer patients with personalized therapies, using biomarkers to determine which treatments are most likely to benefit them, but there are difficulties and unresolved issues in the development and validation of biomarker-based personalized therapies. We develop a new clinical trial design to address some of these issues. The goal is to capture the strengths of the frequentist and Bayesian approaches to address this problem in the recent literature and to circumvent their limitations.
METHODS: We use generalized likelihood ratio tests of the intersection null and enriched strategy null hypotheses to derive a novel clinical trial design for the problem of advancing promising biomarker-guided strategies toward eventual validation. We also investigate the usefulness of adaptive randomization (AR) and futility stopping proposed in the recent literature.
RESULTS: Simulation studies demonstrate the advantages of testing both the narrowly focused enriched strategy null hypothesis related to validating a proposed strategy and the intersection null hypothesis that can accommodate to a potentially successful strategy. AR and early termination of ineffective treatments offer increased probability of receiving the preferred treatment and better response rates for patients in the trial, at the expense of more complicated inference under small-to-moderate total sample sizes and some reduction in power. LIMITATIONS: The binary response used in the development phase may not be a reliable indicator of treatment benefit on long-term clinical outcomes. In the proposed design, the biomarker-guided strategy (BGS) is not compared to 'standard of care', such as physician's choice that may be informed by patient characteristics. Therefore, a positive result does not imply superiority of the BGS to 'standard of care'. The proposed design and tests are valid asymptotically. Simulations are used to examine small-to-moderate sample properties.
CONCLUSION: Innovative clinical trial designs are needed to address the difficulties and issues in the development and validation of biomarker-based personalized therapies. The article shows the advantages of using likelihood inference and interim analysis to meet the challenges in the sample size needed and in the constantly evolving biomarker landscape and genomic and proteomic technologies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22397801      PMCID: PMC4296980          DOI: 10.1177/1740774512437252

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  35 in total

1.  Taxol-resistant epithelial ovarian tumors are associated with altered expression of specific beta-tubulin isotypes.

Authors:  M Kavallaris; D Y Kuo; C A Burkhart; D L Regl; M D Norris; M Haber; S B Horwitz
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  1997-09-01       Impact factor: 14.808

2.  Clinical drug tests adapted for speed.

Authors:  Heidi Ledford
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials.

Authors:  R Simon
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1989-03

4.  Recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma: a randomized phase III study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus topotecan.

Authors:  A N Gordon; J T Fleagle; D Guthrie; D E Parkin; M E Gore; A J Lacave
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2001-07-15       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Topoisomerase IIalpha mRNA and protein expression in ovarian carcinoma: correlation with clinicopathological factors and prognosis.

Authors:  Areeg Faggad; Silvia Darb-Esfahani; Ralph Wirtz; Bruno Sinn; Jalid Sehouli; Dominique Könsgen; Hermann Lage; Wilko Weichert; Aurelia Noske; Jan Budczies; Berit M Müller; Ann-Christin Buckendahl; Annika Röske; Nasr Eldin Elwali; Manfred Dietel; Carsten Denkert
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 7.842

6.  Gene expression patterns in ovarian carcinomas.

Authors:  Marci E Schaner; Douglas T Ross; Giuseppe Ciaravino; Therese Sorlie; Olga Troyanskaya; Maximilian Diehn; Yan C Wang; George E Duran; Thomas L Sikic; Sandra Caldeira; Hanne Skomedal; I-Ping Tu; Tina Hernandez-Boussard; Steven W Johnson; Peter J O'Dwyer; Michael J Fero; Gunnar B Kristensen; Anne-Lise Borresen-Dale; Trevor Hastie; Robert Tibshirani; Matt van de Rijn; Nelson N Teng; Teri A Longacre; David Botstein; Patrick O Brown; Branimir I Sikic
Journal:  Mol Biol Cell       Date:  2003-09-05       Impact factor: 4.138

7.  Predictive biomarkers of chemotherapy efficacy in colorectal cancer: results from the UK MRC FOCUS trial.

Authors:  Michael S Braun; Susan D Richman; Philip Quirke; Catherine Daly; Julian W Adlard; Faye Elliott; Jennifer H Barrett; Peter Selby; Angela M Meade; Richard J Stephens; Mahesh K B Parmar; Matthew T Seymour
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-06-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  The BATTLE trial: personalizing therapy for lung cancer.

Authors:  Edward S Kim; Roy S Herbst; Ignacio I Wistuba; J Jack Lee; George R Blumenschein; Anne Tsao; David J Stewart; Marshall E Hicks; Jeremy Erasmus; Sanjay Gupta; Christine M Alden; Suyu Liu; Ximing Tang; Fadlo R Khuri; Hai T Tran; Bruce E Johnson; John V Heymach; Li Mao; Frank Fossella; Merrill S Kies; Vassiliki Papadimitrakopoulou; Suzanne E Davis; Scott M Lippman; Waun K Hong
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 39.397

9.  Expression of class III beta-tubulin reduces microtubule assembly and confers resistance to paclitaxel.

Authors:  Malathi Hari; Hailing Yang; Changqing Zeng; Martin Canizales; Fernando Cabral
Journal:  Cell Motil Cytoskeleton       Date:  2003-09

10.  Prognostic role of topoisomerase-IIalpha in advanced ovarian cancer patients.

Authors:  G Ferrandina; M Petrillo; A Carbone; G Zannoni; E Martinelli; M Prisco; S Pignata; E Breda; A Savarese; G Scambia
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  7 in total

1.  Commentary on Hey and Kimmelman.

Authors:  J Jack Lee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 2.486

2.  Multicenter trials using ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET to predict chemotherapy response: effects of differential measurement error and bias on power calculations for unselected and enrichment designs.

Authors:  Brenda F Kurland; Robert K Doot; Hannah M Linden; David A Mankoff; Paul E Kinahan
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Adaptive Clinical Trials: Overview of Early-Phase Designs and Challenges.

Authors:  Olga Marchenko; Valerii Fedorov; J Jack Lee; Christy Nolan; José Pinheiro
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 1.778

Review 4.  Clinical trial designs incorporating predictive biomarkers.

Authors:  Lindsay A Renfro; Himel Mallick; Ming-Wen An; Daniel J Sargent; Sumithra J Mandrekar
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 12.111

Review 5.  Next-generation clinical trials: Novel strategies to address the challenge of tumor molecular heterogeneity.

Authors:  Daniel V T Catenacci
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 6.603

Review 6.  Biomarker-Guided Adaptive Trial Designs in Phase II and Phase III: A Methodological Review.

Authors:  Miranta Antoniou; Andrea L Jorgensen; Ruwanthi Kolamunnage-Dona
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Evaluating many treatments and biomarkers in oncology: a new design.

Authors:  Richard Kaplan; Timothy Maughan; Angela Crook; David Fisher; Richard Wilson; Louise Brown; Mahesh Parmar
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-11-18       Impact factor: 44.544

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.