OBJECTIVE: Certain eligibility criteria for Phase 1 cancer clinical trials may impede successful patient enrollment onto a study. We evaluated patient-specific or study-specific reasons for screen failures on Phase 1 oncology clinical trials and discuss factors which may inhibit subject enrollment. METHODS: Thirty-eight Phase 1 clinical trials for solid tumors meeting eligibility criteria and opened for enrollment between February 2006 and February 2011 at one oncology Phase 1 program were examined. Categorical reasons for screen failures and patients' demographics were examined and compared to characteristics of patients that successfully enrolled on a Phase 1 trial. RESULTS: There were a total of 583 successful Phase 1 enrollment and dose administration events out of 773 Phase 1 consent events (75.4 % dose success rate). The three most common reasons for screen failure were: out of protocol-specified range for chemistry, development of an interval medical issue that precluded proceeding with study participation, and subject declining participation after signing consent. Living further away from the Phase 1 program and receipt of fewer prior lines of systemic chemotherapy were significantly associated with increased screen failures. CONCLUSION: Screen failures for Phase 1 studies are not uncommon (24.6 %). When a protocol required tumor or host analyte is not required, most screen failures are due to out of protocol-specified range for chemistry or the development of an interval medical issue. Screen failure rates were increased when patients had longer travel distances and fewer prior lines of systemic chemotherapy.
OBJECTIVE: Certain eligibility criteria for Phase 1 cancer clinical trials may impede successful patient enrollment onto a study. We evaluated patient-specific or study-specific reasons for screen failures on Phase 1 oncology clinical trials and discuss factors which may inhibit subject enrollment. METHODS: Thirty-eight Phase 1 clinical trials for solid tumors meeting eligibility criteria and opened for enrollment between February 2006 and February 2011 at one oncology Phase 1 program were examined. Categorical reasons for screen failures and patients' demographics were examined and compared to characteristics of patients that successfully enrolled on a Phase 1 trial. RESULTS: There were a total of 583 successful Phase 1 enrollment and dose administration events out of 773 Phase 1 consent events (75.4 % dose success rate). The three most common reasons for screen failure were: out of protocol-specified range for chemistry, development of an interval medical issue that precluded proceeding with study participation, and subject declining participation after signing consent. Living further away from the Phase 1 program and receipt of fewer prior lines of systemic chemotherapy were significantly associated with increased screen failures. CONCLUSION: Screen failures for Phase 1 studies are not uncommon (24.6 %). When a protocol required tumor or host analyte is not required, most screen failures are due to out of protocol-specified range for chemistry or the development of an interval medical issue. Screen failure rates were increased when patients had longer travel distances and fewer prior lines of systemic chemotherapy.
Authors: Eunice L Kwak; Yung-Jue Bang; D Ross Camidge; Alice T Shaw; Benjamin Solomon; Robert G Maki; Sai-Hong I Ou; Bruce J Dezube; Pasi A Jänne; Daniel B Costa; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Woo-Ho Kim; Thomas J Lynch; Panos Fidias; Hannah Stubbs; Jeffrey A Engelman; Lecia V Sequist; WeiWei Tan; Leena Gandhi; Mari Mino-Kenudson; Greg C Wei; S Martin Shreeve; Mark J Ratain; Jeffrey Settleman; James G Christensen; Daniel A Haber; Keith Wilner; Ravi Salgia; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Jeffrey W Clark; A John Iafrate Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-10-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Taylor R Pressler; Po-Yin Yen; Jing Ding; Jianhua Liu; Peter J Embi; Philip R O Payne Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2012-05-30 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Jeremy Ho; Gregory R Pond; Colin Newman; Martha Maclean; Eric X Chen; Amit M Oza; Lillian L Siu Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2006-11-08 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: C Baldini; E Charton; E Schultz; L Auroy; A Italiano; M Robert; E Coquan; N Isambert; P Moreau; S Le Gouill; C Le Tourneau; Z Ghrieb; J J Kiladjian; J P Delord; C Gomez Roca; N Vey; F Barlesi; T Lesimple; N Penel; J C Soria; C Massard; S Besle Journal: ESMO Open Date: 2022-05-06