Nolan A Wages1, Craig L Slingluff2, Timothy N Bullock3, Gina R Petroni4. 1. Division of Translational Research and Applied Statistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 800717, Charlottesville, VA, USA. nwages@virginia.edu. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 3. Department of Pathology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 4. Division of Translational Research and Applied Statistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 800717, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In contemporary oncology drug development, implementation of novel early-phase designs with the ability to address multiple research objectives is needed to better refine regimens. This paper describes an adaptive design strategy for identifying a range of optimal regimens based on two endpoints within multiple cohorts. The proposed design was developed to address objectives in an early-phase trial of cancer vaccines in combination with agonistic antibodies to CD40 and CD27. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe a model-based design strategy that was developed for a trial evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of vaccination with (1) peptides plus CD40 antibody and TLR3 ligand, (2) systemic administration of an agonistic CD27 antibody, and (3) to assess immune response from (1) and (2) compared to optimal controls in participants with stage IIB-IV melanoma. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The proposed design is a practical adaptive method for use with combined immunotherapy regimens with multiple objectives within multiple cohorts of interest. Further advances in the effectiveness of cancer immunotherapies will require new approaches that include redefining optimal strategies to take multiple regimens forward into later phases, incorporating additional endpoints in the dose selection process and testing drug combination therapies to improve efficacy and reduce toxicity. Our goal is to facilitate the acceptance and application of more novel designs in contemporary early development trials.
INTRODUCTION: In contemporary oncology drug development, implementation of novel early-phase designs with the ability to address multiple research objectives is needed to better refine regimens. This paper describes an adaptive design strategy for identifying a range of optimal regimens based on two endpoints within multiple cohorts. The proposed design was developed to address objectives in an early-phase trial of cancer vaccines in combination with agonistic antibodies to CD40 and CD27. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe a model-based design strategy that was developed for a trial evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of vaccination with (1) peptides plus CD40 antibody and TLR3 ligand, (2) systemic administration of an agonistic CD27 antibody, and (3) to assess immune response from (1) and (2) compared to optimal controls in participants with stage IIB-IV melanoma. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The proposed design is a practical adaptive method for use with combined immunotherapy regimens with multiple objectives within multiple cohorts of interest. Further advances in the effectiveness of cancer immunotherapies will require new approaches that include redefining optimal strategies to take multiple regimens forward into later phases, incorporating additional endpoints in the dose selection process and testing drug combination therapies to improve efficacy and reduce toxicity. Our goal is to facilitate the acceptance and application of more novel designs in contemporary early development trials.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adaptive design; Cancer vaccines; Combination; Early-phase
Authors: Douglas J Schwartzentruber; David H Lawson; Jon M Richards; Robert M Conry; Donald M Miller; Jonathan Treisman; Fawaz Gailani; Lee Riley; Kevin Conlon; Barbara Pockaj; Kari L Kendra; Richard L White; Rene Gonzalez; Timothy M Kuzel; Brendan Curti; Phillip D Leming; Eric D Whitman; Jai Balkissoon; Douglas S Reintgen; Howard Kaufman; Francesco M Marincola; Maria J Merino; Steven A Rosenberg; Peter Choyke; Don Vena; Patrick Hwu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Craig L Slingluff; Sandra Lee; Fengmin Zhao; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Walter C Olson; Lisa H Butterfield; Theresa L Whiteside; Philip D Leming; John M Kirkwood Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-05-07 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Lei Nie; Eric H Rubin; Nitin Mehrotra; José Pinheiro; Laura L Fernandes; Amit Roy; Stuart Bailey; Dinesh P de Alwis Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-06-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Andrew G Sikora; Nina Jaffarzad; Yared Hailemichael; Alexander Gelbard; Spencer W Stonier; Kimberly S Schluns; Loredana Frasca; Yanyan Lou; Chengwen Liu; Helen A Andersson; Patrick Hwu; Willem W Overwijk Journal: J Immunol Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Brian P Hobbs; Pedro C Barata; Yada Kanjanapan; Channing J Paller; Jane Perlmutter; Gregory R Pond; Tatiana M Prowell; Eric H Rubin; Lesley K Seymour; Nolan A Wages; Timothy A Yap; David Feltquate; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; William Grossman; David S Hong; S Percy Ivy; Lillian L Siu; Steven A Reeves; Gary L Rosner Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Marit M Melssen; Gina R Petroni; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Nolan A Wages; William W Grosh; Nikole Varhegyi; Mark E Smolkin; Kelly T Smith; Nadejda V Galeassi; Donna H Deacon; Elizabeth M Gaughan; Craig L Slingluff Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Paul Sabbatini; Takemasa Tsuji; Luis Ferran; Erika Ritter; Christine Sedrak; Kevin Tuballes; Achim A Jungbluth; Gerd Ritter; Carol Aghajanian; Katherine Bell-McGuinn; Martee L Hensley; Jason Konner; William Tew; David R Spriggs; Eric W Hoffman; Ralph Venhaus; Linda Pan; Andres M Salazar; Catherine Magid Diefenbach; Lloyd J Old; Sacha Gnjatic Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-10-02 Impact factor: 12.531