Literature DB >> 26597302

Optimal Dosing for Targeted Therapies in Oncology: Drug Development Cases Leading by Example.

Jeffrey R Sachs1, Kapil Mayawala2, Satvik Gadamsetty3, Soonmo Peter Kang4, Dinesh P de Alwis5.   

Abstract

One of the key objectives of oncology first-in-human trials has often been to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). However, targeted therapies might not exhibit dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) at doses significantly higher than sufficiently active doses, and there is frequently a limited ability to objectively quantify adverse events. Thus, while MTD-based determination of recommended phase II dose may have yielded appropriate dosing for some cytotoxics, targeted therapeutics (including monoclonal antibodies and/or immunotherapies) sometimes need alternative or complementary strategies to help identify dose ranges for a randomized dose-ranging study. One complementary strategy is to define a biologically efficacious dose (BED) using an "effect marker." An effect marker could be a target engagement, pharmacodynamic, or disease progression marker (change in tumor size for solid tumors or bone marrow blast count for some hematologic tumors). Although the concept of BED has been discussed extensively, we review specific examples in which the approach influenced oncology clinical development. Data extracted from the literature and the examples support improving dose selection strategies to benefit patients, providers, and the biopharmaceutical industry. Although the examples illustrate key contributions of effect markers in dose selection, no one-size-fits-all approach to dosing can be justified. Higher-than-optimal dosing can increase toxicity in later trials (and in clinical use), which can have a negative impact on efficacy (via lower adherence or direct sequelae of toxicities). Proper dose selection in oncology should follow a multifactorial decision process leading to a randomized, dose-ranging study instead of a single phase II dose. ©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26597302     DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1295

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


  47 in total

1.  Slow-, Tight-Binding Inhibition of CYP17A1 by Abiraterone Redefines Its Kinetic Selectivity and Dosing Regimen.

Authors:  Eleanor Jing Yi Cheong; Pramod C Nair; Rebecca Wan Yi Neo; Ho Thanh Tu; Fu Lin; Edmund Chiong; Kesavan Esuvaranathan; Hao Fan; Russell Z Szmulewitz; Cody J Peer; William D Figg; Christina Li Lin Chai; John O Miners; Eric Chun Yong Chan
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 4.030

2.  Mechanistic Distinctions between CHK1 and WEE1 Inhibition Guide the Scheduling of Triple Therapy with Gemcitabine.

Authors:  Siang-Boon Koh; Yann Wallez; Charles R Dunlop; Sandra Bernaldo de Quirós Fernández; Tashinga E Bapiro; Frances M Richards; Duncan I Jodrell
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 12.701

3.  Implementation of a Model-Based Design in a Phase Ib Study of Combined Targeted Agents.

Authors:  Nolan A Wages; Craig A Portell; Michael E Williams; Mark R Conaway; Gina R Petroni
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 12.531

4.  Immuno-PET to Optimize the Dose of Monoclonal Antibodies for Cancer Therapy: How Much Is Enough?

Authors:  Raymond M Reilly
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 10.057

5.  BOIN12: Bayesian Optimal Interval Phase I/II Trial Design for Utility-Based Dose Finding in Immunotherapy and Targeted Therapies.

Authors:  Ruitao Lin; Yanhong Zhou; Fangrong Yan; Daniel Li; Ying Yuan
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2020-11-16

Review 6.  Precision medicine needs randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Everardo D Saad; Xavier Paoletti; Tomasz Burzykowski; Marc Buyse
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  New strategies in esophageal carcinoma: promises and problems.

Authors:  Zhaohui Xiong; Jingxi He; Xiaoxin Luke Chen
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Optimizing bevacizumab dosing in glioblastoma: less is more.

Authors:  Abdulrazag Ajlan; Piia Thomas; Abdulrahman Albakr; Seema Nagpal; Lawrence Recht
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 9.  Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Melanoma: A Review of Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Response Relationships.

Authors:  Cyril Leven; Maël Padelli; Jean-Luc Carré; Eric Bellissant; Laurent Misery
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 6.447

10.  Molecular Pharmacodynamics-Guided Scheduling of Biologically Effective Doses: A Drug Development Paradigm Applied to MET Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.

Authors:  Apurva K Srivastava; Melinda G Hollingshead; Jeevan Prasaad Govindharajulu; Joseph M Covey; Dane Liston; Melanie A Simpson; James O Peggins; Donald P Bottaro; John J Wright; Robert J Kinders; James H Doroshow; Ralph E Parchment
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 6.261

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.