Han Hsi Wong1, Claire Barton2, Gary Acton2, Robert McLeod2, Sarah Halford2. 1. Cancer Research UK Centre for Drug Development, Angel Building, 407 St. John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK; Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Box 193, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK. Electronic address: han.wong@nhs.net. 2. Cancer Research UK Centre for Drug Development, Angel Building, 407 St. John Street, London EC1V 4AD, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Phase I oncology trials have evolved over the years, and these changes could have implications for future studies and patients. METHODS: Adult trials sponsored by Cancer Research UK Centre for Drug Development between 1995 and 2013 were analysed. Forty-nine trials were divided into two groups based on the starting date for recruitment: 1995-2003 (24 trials, n = 603) and 2004-2013 (25 trials, n = 750) for comparative purposes. RESULTS: From 1995-2003 to 2004-2013, there was a shift towards studying non-cytotoxic agents that are administered orally. In later trials, patients tended to have better performance status, were older, had greater disease burden, and were more likely to have received prior treatment. In 2004-2013, wider variety of dose escalation designs were used, and studies were more likely to be multicentre, target/disease specific, conducted in first-/any-line setting and to require tumour biopsy. The overall incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) was unchanged (10.9%; risk of death 0.4%), but DLTs such as neuropathy, stomatitis and thrombocytopaenia were less frequent in the more recent trials, while elevated liver enzymes were more frequent. Non-classical DLTs emerged in the later trials, including hypertension, hypophosphataemia, cardiac and ophthalmic toxicities. Disease control rate (DCR) increased from 27.9% (1995-2003) to 36.0% (2004-2013; P = 0.0033) due to higher rates of disease stabilisation. CONCLUSION: Changes in trial designs, therapeutic agents, patient characteristics and DLTs were observed. Although the nature of DLTs changed, the incidence was similar in the two time periods and DCR improved, suggesting that the benefit-risk balance for patients participating in early-phase trials remains acceptable.
INTRODUCTION: Phase I oncology trials have evolved over the years, and these changes could have implications for future studies and patients. METHODS: Adult trials sponsored by Cancer Research UK Centre for Drug Development between 1995 and 2013 were analysed. Forty-nine trials were divided into two groups based on the starting date for recruitment: 1995-2003 (24 trials, n = 603) and 2004-2013 (25 trials, n = 750) for comparative purposes. RESULTS: From 1995-2003 to 2004-2013, there was a shift towards studying non-cytotoxic agents that are administered orally. In later trials, patients tended to have better performance status, were older, had greater disease burden, and were more likely to have received prior treatment. In 2004-2013, wider variety of dose escalation designs were used, and studies were more likely to be multicentre, target/disease specific, conducted in first-/any-line setting and to require tumour biopsy. The overall incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) was unchanged (10.9%; risk of death 0.4%), but DLTs such as neuropathy, stomatitis and thrombocytopaenia were less frequent in the more recent trials, while elevated liver enzymes were more frequent. Non-classical DLTs emerged in the later trials, including hypertension, hypophosphataemia, cardiac and ophthalmic toxicities. Disease control rate (DCR) increased from 27.9% (1995-2003) to 36.0% (2004-2013; P = 0.0033) due to higher rates of disease stabilisation. CONCLUSION: Changes in trial designs, therapeutic agents, patient characteristics and DLTs were observed. Although the nature of DLTs changed, the incidence was similar in the two time periods and DCR improved, suggesting that the benefit-risk balance for patients participating in early-phase trials remains acceptable.
Authors: Marcin Waligora; Malgorzata M Bala; Magdalena Koperny; Mateusz T Wasylewski; Karolina Strzebonska; Rafał R Jaeschke; Agnieszka Wozniak; Jan Piasecki; Agnieszka Sliwka; Jerzy W Mitus; Maciej Polak; Dominika Nowis; Dean Fergusson; Jonathan Kimmelman Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Victoria K Woodcock; Sally Clive; Richard H Wilson; Vicky M Coyle; Michael R L Stratford; Lisa K Folkes; Richard Eastell; Claire Barton; Paul Jones; Shamim Kazmi-Stokes; Helen Turner; Sarah Halford; Adrian L Harris; Mark R Middleton Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Liza G G van Lent; Nicole K Stoel; Julia C M van Weert; Jelle van Gurp; Maja J A de Jonge; Martijn P Lolkema; Eelke H Gort; Saskia M Pulleman; Esther Oomen-de Hoop; Jeroen Hasselaar; Carin C D van der Rijt Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2019-11-29 Impact factor: 3.234