Literature DB >> 25414851

Drug designs fulfilling the requirements of clinical trials aiming at personalizing medicine.

Sumithra J Mandrekar1, Daniel J Sargent1.   

Abstract

In the current era of stratified medicine and biomarker-driven therapies, the focus has shifted from predictions based on the traditional anatomic staging systems to guide the choice of treatment for an individual patient to an integrated approach using the genetic makeup of the tumor and the genotype of the patient. The clinical trial designs utilized in the developmental pathway for biomarkers and biomarker-directed therapies from discovery to clinical practice are rapidly evolving. While several issues need careful consideration, two critical issues that surround the validation of biomarkers are the choice of the clinical trial design (which is based on the strength of the preliminary evidence and marker prevalence), and biomarker assay related issues surrounding the marker assessment methods such as the reliability and reproducibility of the assay. In this review, we focus on trial designs aiming at personalized medicine in the context of early phase trials for initial marker validation, as well as in the context of larger definitive trials. Designs for biomarker validation are broadly classified as retrospective (i.e., using data from previously well-conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) versus prospective (enrichment, all-comers, hybrid or adaptive). We believe that the systematic evaluation and implementation of these design strategies are essential to accelerate the clinical validation of biomarker guided therapy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  All-comers design; adaptive design; biomarker; enrichment design; hybrid design; randomized controlled trial (RCT)

Year:  2014        PMID: 25414851      PMCID: PMC4236025          DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2304-3865.2014.05.03

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chin Clin Oncol        ISSN: 2304-3865


  47 in total

Review 1.  Biomarkers and surrogate end points--the challenge of statistical validation.

Authors:  Marc Buyse; Daniel J Sargent; Axel Grothey; Alastair Matheson; Aimery de Gramont
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  A method for testing a prespecified subgroup in clinical trials.

Authors:  Yang Song; George Y H Chi
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-08-30       Impact factor: 2.373

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.  Use of genomic signatures in therapeutics development in oncology and other diseases.

Authors:  R Simon; S-J Wang
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.550

5.  Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria.

Authors:  R L Prentice
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Rationale for treatment and study design of tailor: a randomized phase III trial of second-line erlotinib versus docetaxel in the treatment of patients affected by advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with the absence of epidermal growth factor receptor mutations.

Authors:  Gabriella Farina; Flavia Longo; Olga Martelli; Ida Pavese; Andrea Mancuso; Luca Moscetti; Roberto Labianca; Alessandro Bertolini; Enrico Cortesi; Antonio Farris; Daniele Fagnani; Maria Cristina Locatelli; Giuseppe Valmadre; Antonio Ardizzoia; Maurizio Tomirotti; Eliana Rulli; Marina Chiara Garassino; Alberto Scanni
Journal:  Clin Lung Cancer       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 4.785

7.  A strategy for dose-finding and safety monitoring based on efficacy and adverse outcomes in phase I/II clinical trials.

Authors:  P F Thall; K E Russell
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  The bivariate continual reassessment method. extending the CRM to phase I trials of two competing outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas M Braun
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2002-06

9.  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

10.  Speeding up the evaluation of new agents in cancer.

Authors:  Mahesh K B Parmar; Friederike M-S Barthel; Matthew Sydes; Ruth Langley; Rick Kaplan; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Mark Brady; Nicholas James; Michael A Bookman; Ann-Marie Swart; Wendi Qian; Patrick Royston
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-08-26       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  3 in total

1.  DICOM for Clinical Research: PACS-Integrated Electronic Data Capture in Multi-Center Trials.

Authors:  Daniel Haak; Charles-E Page; Sebastian Reinartz; Thilo Krüger; Thomas M Deserno
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 2.  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

3.  Predicting Prognosis of Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Using the GeneFx® Lung Signature.

Authors:  Sandy Der; Chang-Qi Zhu; Stacey Brower; Arlette Uihlein
Journal:  PLoS Curr       Date:  2015-10-26
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.