Randy F Sweis1, Michael W Drazer1, Mark J Ratain2. 1. Randy F. Sweis and Michael W. Drazer, University of Chicago; Mark J. Ratain, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL. 2. Randy F. Sweis and Michael W. Drazer, University of Chicago; Mark J. Ratain, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL. mratain@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The use of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers is increasing in early-phase clinical trials. It remains unknown whether drug development is accelerated or enhanced by their use. We examined the impact of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers on subsequent drug development through a comprehensive analysis of phase I oncology studies from 2003 to 2010 and subsequent publications citing the original trials. METHODS: We conducted a search to identify and examine publications of phase I oncology studies including the use of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers between 2003 and 2010. Characteristics of those studies were extracted and analyzed, along with outcomes from the biomarker data. We then compiled and reviewed publications of subsequent phase II and III trials citing the original phase I biomarker studies to determine the impact on drug development. RESULTS: We identified 4,840 phase I oncology publications between 2003 and 2010. Seventy-two studies included a biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarker. The proportion of biomarker studies including nondiagnostic biopsies increased over time (P = .002). A minimum of 1,873 tumor biopsies were documented in the 72 studies, 12 of which reported a statistically significant biomarker result. Thirty-three percent of studies (n = 24) were referenced by subsequent publications specifically with regard to the biomarkers. Only five positive biomarker studies were cited subsequently, and maximum tolerated dose was used for subsequent drug development in all cases. CONCLUSION: Despite their increased use, the impact of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers in phase I oncology studies on subsequent drug development remains uncertain. No impact on subsequent dose or schedule was demonstrated. This issue requires further evaluation, given the risk and cost of such studies.
PURPOSE: The use of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers is increasing in early-phase clinical trials. It remains unknown whether drug development is accelerated or enhanced by their use. We examined the impact of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers on subsequent drug development through a comprehensive analysis of phase I oncology studies from 2003 to 2010 and subsequent publications citing the original trials. METHODS: We conducted a search to identify and examine publications of phase I oncology studies including the use of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers between 2003 and 2010. Characteristics of those studies were extracted and analyzed, along with outcomes from the biomarker data. We then compiled and reviewed publications of subsequent phase II and III trials citing the original phase I biomarker studies to determine the impact on drug development. RESULTS: We identified 4,840 phase I oncology publications between 2003 and 2010. Seventy-two studies included a biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarker. The proportion of biomarker studies including nondiagnostic biopsies increased over time (P = .002). A minimum of 1,873 tumor biopsies were documented in the 72 studies, 12 of which reported a statistically significant biomarker result. Thirty-three percent of studies (n = 24) were referenced by subsequent publications specifically with regard to the biomarkers. Only five positive biomarker studies were cited subsequently, and maximum tolerated dose was used for subsequent drug development in all cases. CONCLUSION: Despite their increased use, the impact of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers in phase I oncology studies on subsequent drug development remains uncertain. No impact on subsequent dose or schedule was demonstrated. This issue requires further evaluation, given the risk and cost of such studies.
Authors: Bernardo H L Goulart; Jeffrey W Clark; Homer H Pien; Thomas G Roberts; Stan N Finkelstein; Bruce A Chabner Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-11-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: J Tabernero; F Ciardiello; F Rivera; E Rodriguez-Braun; F J Ramos; E Martinelli; M E Vega-Villegas; S Roselló; S Liebscher; O Kisker; T Macarulla; J Baselga; A Cervantes Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2009-11-25 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Josep Tabernero; Federico Rojo; Emiliano Calvo; Howard Burris; Ian Judson; Katharine Hazell; Erika Martinelli; Santiago Ramon y Cajal; Suzanne Jones; Laura Vidal; Nicholas Shand; Teresa Macarulla; Francisco Javier Ramos; Sasa Dimitrijevic; Ulrike Zoellner; Pui Tang; Michael Stumm; Heidi A Lane; David Lebwohl; José Baselga Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Daniel S W Tan; George V Thomas; Michelle D Garrett; Udai Banerji; Johann S de Bono; Stan B Kaye; Paul Workman Journal: Cancer J Date: 2009 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 3.360
Authors: Enriqueta Felip; Federico Rojo; Martin Reck; Astrid Heller; Barbara Klughammer; Gemma Sala; Susana Cedres; Sergio Peralta; Heiko Maacke; Dorothee Foernzler; Marta Parera; Joachim Möcks; Cristina Saura; Ulrich Gatzemeier; José Baselga Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Christine M Parseghian; Kanwal Raghav; Robert A Wolff; Joe Ensor; James Yao; Lee M Ellis; Alda L Tam; Michael J Overman Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-07-28 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Seung Tae Kim; Kimberly C Banks; Se-Hoon Lee; Kyung Kim; Joon Oh Park; Se Hoon Park; Young Suk Park; Ho Yeong Lim; Won Ki Kang; Richard B Lanman; AmirAli Talasaz; Keunchil Park; Jeeyun Lee Journal: JCO Precis Oncol Date: 2017-06-26
Authors: Sander Bins; Geert A Cirkel; Christa G Gadellaa-Van Hooijdonk; Fleur Weeber; Isaac J Numan; Annette H Bruggink; Paul J van Diest; Stefan M Willems; Wouter B Veldhuis; Michel M van den Heuvel; Rob J de Knegt; Marco J Koudijs; Erik van Werkhoven; Ron H J Mathijssen; Edwin Cuppen; Stefan Sleijfer; Jan H M Schellens; Emile E Voest; Marlies H G Langenberg; Maja J A de Jonge; Neeltje Steeghs; Martijn P Lolkema Journal: Oncologist Date: 2016-09-23
Authors: Marie Viala; Marie Vinches; Marie Alexandre; Caroline Mollevi; Anna Durigova; Nadia Hayaoui; Krisztian Homicsko; Alice Cuenant; Céline Gongora; Luca Gianni; Diego Tosi Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 7.640