Literature DB >> 22422406

Development and use of integral assays in clinical trials.

Richard L Schilsky1, James H Doroshow, Michael Leblanc, Barbara A Conley.   

Abstract

Clinical trials that include integral biomarkers to determine eligibility, assign treatment, or assess outcome must employ robust assays to measure the molecular analyte of interest. The decision to develop a biomarker assay into a test suitable for use in humans should be driven by clinical need, that is, there should be a clear clinical purpose for undertaking the test development. Supporting in vitro or in vivo research on the ability of the marker to distinguish subgroups of patients with a given characteristic is necessary. The magnitude of the difference in treatment effect expected with use of the marker should be sufficient to support differential treatment prescription for marker-positive and -negative patients. Analytical and clinical validation of the marker assay should be completed before the clinical trial is initiated to ensure that the assay is stable enough for clinical use throughout the trial. Clinical use of the assay requires that it be performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-accredited laboratory, and the need to apply for an Investigational Device Exemption from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration should be considered. In this article we elaborate on the steps required to get a biomarker assay ready for use as an integral component of a clinical trial and give an example of the use of an integral assay in a phase III trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22422406      PMCID: PMC3307146          DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2202

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


  19 in total

1.  Biomarkers and surrogate end points for fit-for-purpose development and regulatory evaluation of new drugs.

Authors:  J A Wagner; S A Williams; C J Webster
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  Fit-for-purpose method development and validation for successful biomarker measurement.

Authors:  Jean W Lee; Viswanath Devanarayan; Yu Chen Barrett; Russell Weiner; John Allinson; Scott Fountain; Stephen Keller; Ira Weinryb; Marie Green; Larry Duan; James A Rogers; Robert Millham; Peter J O'Brien; Jeff Sailstad; Masood Khan; Chad Ray; John A Wagner
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2006-01-12       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 3.  A cost-effectiveness approach to the qualification and acceptance of biomarkers.

Authors:  Stephen A Williams; David E Slavin; John A Wagner; Christopher J Webster
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 84.694

4.  Parallel anticancer drug development and molecular stratification to qualify predictive biomarkers: dealing with obstacles hindering progress.

Authors:  Victor Moreno Garcia; Philippe A Cassier; Johann de Bono
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 39.397

5.  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

6.  Synergistic effects of new chemopreventive agents and conventional cytotoxic agents against human lung cancer cell lines.

Authors:  A F Soriano; B Helfrich; D C Chan; L E Heasley; P A Bunn; T C Chou
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1999-12-15       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 7.  Validation of analytic methods for biomarkers used in drug development.

Authors:  Cindy H Chau; Olivier Rixe; Howard McLeod; William D Figg
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 12.531

8.  Eicosanoid modulation in advanced lung cancer: cyclooxygenase-2 expression is a positive predictive factor for celecoxib + chemotherapy--Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 30203.

Authors:  Martin J Edelman; Dee Watson; Xiaofei Wang; Carl Morrison; Robert A Kratzke; Scott Jewell; Lydia Hodgson; Ann M Mauer; Ajeet Gajra; Gregory A Masters; Michelle Bedor; Everett E Vokes; Mark J Green
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Bayesian adaptive design for targeted therapy development in lung cancer--a step toward personalized medicine.

Authors:  Xian Zhou; Suyu Liu; Edward S Kim; Roy S Herbst; J Jack Lee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.486

10.  A perspective on challenges and issues in biomarker development and drug and biomarker codevelopment.

Authors:  Sheila E Taube; Gary M Clark; Janet E Dancey; Lisa M McShane; Caroline C Sigman; Steven I Gutman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  15 in total

Review 1.  Whole-Exome Sequencing and Whole-Genome Sequencing in Critically Ill Neonates Suspected to Have Single-Gene Disorders.

Authors:  Laurie D Smith; Laurel K Willig; Stephen F Kingsmore
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 6.915

Review 2.  Current status of molecular biomarkers in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  H M J Werner; H B Salvesen
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 5.075

3.  Leveling the playing field: bringing development of biomarkers and molecular diagnostics up to the standards for drug development.

Authors:  George Poste; David P Carbone; David R Parkinson; Jaap Verweij; Stephen M Hewitt; J Milburn Jessup
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

4.  Lessons learned from the investigational device exemption review of Children's Oncology Group trial AAML1031.

Authors:  Soheil Meshinchi; Stephen P Hunger; Richard Aplenc; Peter C Adamson; J Milburn Jessup
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  Impact of preanalytic factors on the design and application of integral biomarkers for directing patient therapy.

Authors:  Stephen M Hewitt; Sunil S Badve; Lawrence D True
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Bridging the gap: moving predictive and prognostic assays from research to clinical use.

Authors:  P Michael Williams; Tracy G Lively; J Milburn Jessup; Barbara A Conley
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 7.  Biomarker development in the context of urologic cancers.

Authors:  Gary J Kelloff; Caroline C Sigman; Howard I Scher
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 8.  Prognostic Gene Expression Profiling in Cutaneous Melanoma: Identifying the Knowledge Gaps and Assessing the Clinical Benefit.

Authors:  Douglas Grossman; Nwanneka Okwundu; Edmund K Bartlett; Michael A Marchetti; Megan Othus; Daniel G Coit; Rebecca I Hartman; Sancy A Leachman; Elizabeth G Berry; Larissa Korde; Sandra J Lee; Menashe Bar-Eli; Marianne Berwick; Tawnya Bowles; Elizabeth I Buchbinder; Elizabeth M Burton; Emily Y Chu; Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski; Julia A Curtis; Adil Daud; Dekker C Deacon; Laura K Ferris; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Kenneth F Grossmann; Siwen Hu-Lieskovan; John Hyngstrom; Joanne M Jeter; Robert L Judson-Torres; Kari L Kendra; Caroline C Kim; John M Kirkwood; David H Lawson; Philip D Leming; Georgina V Long; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Janice M Mehnert; Michael E Ming; Kelly C Nelson; David Polsky; Richard A Scolyer; Eric A Smith; Vernon K Sondak; Mitchell S Stark; Jennifer A Stein; John A Thompson; John F Thompson; Suraj S Venna; Maria L Wei; Susan M Swetter
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 10.282

Review 9.  Molecular biomarkers for grass pollen immunotherapy.

Authors:  Florin-Dan Popescu
Journal:  World J Methodol       Date:  2014-03-26

Review 10.  Validation and clinical utility of prostate cancer biomarkers.

Authors:  Howard I Scher; Michael J Morris; Steven Larson; Glenn Heller
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 66.675

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.