Literature DB >> 24281059

Biomarker enrichment strategies: matching trial design to biomarker credentials.

Boris Freidlin1, Edward L Korn1.   

Abstract

The use of biomarkers to identify patients who can benefit from treatment with a specific anticancer agent has the potential to both improve patient care and accelerate drug development. The development of targeted agents and their accompanying biomarkers frequently occurs contemporaneously, and confidence in a putative biomarker's performance might, therefore, be insufficient to restrict the definitive testing of a new agent to the subgroup of biomarker-positive patients. This Review considers which clinical trial designs and analysis strategies are appropriate for use in phase III, biomarker-driven, randomized clinical trials, on the basis of pre-existing evidence that the biomarker can successfully identify patients who will respond to the treatment in question. The types of interim monitoring that are appropriate for these trials are also discussed. In addition, enrichment strategies based on the use of prognostic biomarkers to separate a population into subgroups with better and worse outcomes, regardless of treatment, are described. Finally, the possibility of formally using a biomarker during phase II drug development, to select what type of biomarker-driven strategy should be used in the phase III trial, is discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24281059     DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2013.218

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol        ISSN: 1759-4774            Impact factor:   66.675


  47 in total

1.  Testing in a Prespecified Subgroup and the Intent-to-Treat Population.

Authors:  Mark D Rothmann; Jenny J Zhang; Laura Lu; Thomas R Fleming
Journal:  Drug Inf J       Date:  2012-03-01

2.  Design issues of randomized phase II trials and a proposal for phase II screening trials.

Authors:  Lawrence V Rubinstein; Edward L Korn; Boris Freidlin; Sally Hunsberger; S Percy Ivy; Malcolm A Smith
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Statistical issues in the validation of prognostic, predictive, and surrogate biomarkers.

Authors:  Daniel J Sargent; Sumithra J Mandrekar
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-08-27       Impact factor: 2.486

4.  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

5.  Phase III clinical trials that integrate treatment and biomarker evaluation.

Authors:  Boris Freidlin; Zhuoxin Sun; Robert Gray; Edward L Korn
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  HER2 and chromosome 17 effect on patient outcome in the N9831 adjuvant trastuzumab trial.

Authors:  Edith A Perez; Monica M Reinholz; David W Hillman; Kathleen S Tenner; Matthew J Schroeder; Nancy E Davidson; Silvana Martino; George W Sledge; Lyndsay N Harris; Julie R Gralow; Amylou C Dueck; Rhett P Ketterling; James N Ingle; Wilma L Lingle; Peter A Kaufman; Daniel W Visscher; Robert B Jenkins
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-08-09       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Treatment Rationale Study Design for the MetLung Trial: A Randomized, Double-Blind Phase III Study of Onartuzumab (MetMAb) in Combination With Erlotinib Versus Erlotinib Alone in Patients Who Have Received Standard Chemotherapy for Stage IIIB or IV Met-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  David R Spigel; Martin J Edelman; Tony Mok; Kenneth O'Byrne; Luis Paz-Ares; Wei Yu; Karen Rittweger; Holger Thurm
Journal:  Clin Lung Cancer       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.785

Review 8.  Integrating comparative effectiveness design elements and endpoints into a phase III, randomized clinical trial (SWOG S1007) evaluating oncotypeDX-guided management for women with breast cancer involving lymph nodes.

Authors:  Scott D Ramsey; William E Barlow; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo; Sean Tunis; Laurence Baker; John Crowley; Patricia Deverka; David Veenstra; Gabriel N Hortobagyi
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 2.226

9.  Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations.

Authors:  Lecia V Sequist; James Chih-Hsin Yang; Nobuyuki Yamamoto; Kenneth O'Byrne; Vera Hirsh; Tony Mok; Sarayut Lucien Geater; Sergey Orlov; Chun-Ming Tsai; Michael Boyer; Wu-Chou Su; Jaafar Bennouna; Terufumi Kato; Vera Gorbunova; Ki Hyeong Lee; Riyaz Shah; Dan Massey; Victoria Zazulina; Mehdi Shahidi; Martin Schuler
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-07-01       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Criteria for the use of omics-based predictors in clinical trials: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Lisa M McShane; Margaret M Cavenagh; Tracy G Lively; David A Eberhard; William L Bigbee; P Mickey Williams; Jill P Mesirov; Mei-Yin C Polley; Kelly Y Kim; James V Tricoli; Jeremy M G Taylor; Deborah J Shuman; Richard M Simon; James H Doroshow; Barbara A Conley
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 11.150

View more
  56 in total

1.  Molecular profiling and targeted therapy for advanced thoracic malignancies: a biomarker-derived, multiarm, multihistology phase II basket trial.

Authors:  Ariel Lopez-Chavez; Anish Thomas; Arun Rajan; Mark Raffeld; Betsy Morrow; Ronan Kelly; Corey Allan Carter; Udayan Guha; Keith Killian; Christopher C Lau; Zied Abdullaev; Liqiang Xi; Svetlana Pack; Paul S Meltzer; Christopher L Corless; Alan Sandler; Carol Beadling; Andrea Warrick; David J Liewehr; Seth M Steinberg; Arlene Berman; Austin Doyle; Eva Szabo; Yisong Wang; Giuseppe Giaccone
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-02-09       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Adaptive Clinical Trials: Advantages and Disadvantages of Various Adaptive Design Elements.

Authors:  Edward L Korn; Boris Freidlin
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 3.  Prognostic and Predictive Immunohistochemistry-Based Biomarkers in Cancer and Immunotherapy.

Authors:  Emanuelle M Rizk; Robyn D Gartrell; Luke W Barker; Camden L Esancy; Grace G Finkel; Darius D Bordbar; Yvonne M Saenger
Journal:  Hematol Oncol Clin North Am       Date:  2019-01-17       Impact factor: 3.722

4.  Genomic Profiling in Gastrointestinal Cancer: Are We Ready To Use These Data to Make Treatment Decisions?

Authors:  Richard M Goldberg
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2015-10-28

Review 5.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer perspective on designing clinical trials with immune therapeutics.

Authors:  Jessica Menis; Saskia Litière; Konstantinos Tryfonidis; Vassilis Golfinopoulos
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-07

Review 6.  Phase III Precision Medicine Clinical Trial Designs That Integrate Treatment and Biomarker Evaluation.

Authors:  Mei-Yin C Polley; Edward L Korn; Boris Freidlin
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2019-10-24

Review 7.  Biomarker-Driven Oncology Clinical Trials: Key Design Elements, Types, Features, and Practical Considerations.

Authors:  Chen Hu; James J Dignam
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2019-10-24

Review 8.  Clinical trials in gynecologic oncology: Past, present, and future.

Authors:  Christina M Annunziata; Elise C Kohn
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-12-06       Impact factor: 5.482

9.  The Challenge for Development of Valuable Immuno-oncology Biomarkers.

Authors:  Janice M Mehnert; Arta M Monjazeb; Johanna M T Beerthuijzen; Deborah Collyar; Larry Rubinstein; Lyndsay N Harris
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 10.  Small cell lung cancer (SCLC): no treatment advances in recent years.

Authors:  Filippos Koinis; Athanasios Kotsakis; Vasileios Georgoulias
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2016-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.