Literature DB >> 35965268

Oncology dose optimization paradigms: knowledge gained and extrapolated from approved oncology therapeutics.

Rajendar K Mittapalli1, Cen Guo2, Stefanie K Drescher2, Donghua Yin2.   

Abstract

There has been increasing attention to dose optimization in the development of targeted oncology therapeutics. The current report has analyzed the dose selection approaches for 116 new molecular entities (NMEs) approved for oncology indications by the US FDA from 2010 to August 2021, with the goal to extract learnings about the ways to select the optimal dose. The analysis showed that: (1) the initial label dose was lower than the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or maximum studied dose (MSD) in Phase 1 for the majority of approved NMEs, and that the MTD approach is no longer the mainstay for dose selection; (2) there was no dose ranging or optimization beyond Phase 1 dose escalation for ~ 80% of the NMEs; (3) integrated dose/exposure-response analyses were commonly used to justify the dose selection; (4) lack of dose optimization led to dose-related PMRs/PMCs in 14% of cases, but 82% of these did not result in change of the initial label dose; and (5) depending on properties of the NME and specific benefit/risk considerations for the target patient population, there could be different dose selection paradigms leading to identification of the appropriate clinical dose. The analysis supports the need to incorporate more robust dose optimization during oncology clinical development, through comparative assessment of benefit/risk of multiple dose levels, over a wide exposure range using therapeutically relevant endpoints and adequate sample size. On the other hand, in certain cases, data from FIP dose escalation may be adequate to support the dose selection.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dose selection; Maximum tolerated dose; Oncology; Optimal dose; Recommended phase 2 dose

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35965268     DOI: 10.1007/s00280-022-04444-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol        ISSN: 0344-5704            Impact factor:   3.288


  11 in total

Review 1.  Optimizing dosing of oncology drugs.

Authors:  L Minasian; O Rosen; D Auclair; A Rahman; R Pazdur; R L Schilsky
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 2.  Determining the optimal dose in the development of anticancer agents.

Authors:  Ron H J Mathijssen; Alex Sparreboom; Jaap Verweij
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Dose Finding of Small-Molecule Oncology Drugs: Optimization throughout the Development Life Cycle.

Authors:  Pasi A Jänne; Geoffrey Kim; Alice T Shaw; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Richard Pazdur; Amy E McKee
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 4.  Clinical efficacy of the optimal biological dose in early-phase trials of anti-cancer targeted therapies.

Authors:  Pauline Corbaux; Mévidette El-Madani; Michel Tod; Julien Péron; Denis Maillet; Jonathan Lopez; Gilles Freyer; Benoit You
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2019-08-31       Impact factor: 9.162

5.  Phase I, dose-escalation trial of the oral cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor PD 0332991, administered using a 21-day schedule in patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  Keith T Flaherty; Patricia M Lorusso; Angela Demichele; Vandana G Abramson; Rachel Courtney; Sophia S Randolph; M Naveed Shaik; Keith D Wilner; Peter J O'Dwyer; Gary K Schwartz
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-11-16       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Ponatinib dose-ranging study in chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia: a randomized, open-label phase 2 clinical trial.

Authors:  Jorge Cortes; Jane Apperley; Elza Lomaia; Beatriz Moiraghi; Maria Undurraga Sutton; Carolina Pavlovsky; Charles Chuah; Tomasz Sacha; Jeffrey H Lipton; Charles A Schiffer; James McCloskey; Andreas Hochhaus; Philippe Rousselot; Gianantonio Rosti; Hugues de Lavallade; Anna Turkina; Christine Rojas; Christopher Kevin Arthur; Lori Maness; Moshe Talpaz; Michael Mauro; Tracey Hall; Vickie Lu; Shouryadeep Srivastava; Michael Deininger
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 25.476

7.  ASCEND-8: A Randomized Phase 1 Study of Ceritinib, 450 mg or 600 mg, Taken with a Low-Fat Meal versus 750 mg in Fasted State in Patients with Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK)-Rearranged Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

Authors:  Byoung Chul Cho; Dong-Wan Kim; Alessandra Bearz; Scott A Laurie; Mark McKeage; Gloria Borra; Keunchil Park; Sang-We Kim; Marwan Ghosn; Andrea Ardizzoni; Evaristo Maiello; Alastair Greystoke; Richard Yu; Karen Osborne; Wen Gu; Jeffrey W Scott; Vanessa Q Passos; Yvonne Y Lau; Anna Wrona
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 15.609

Review 8.  Optimal Dosing for Targeted Therapies in Oncology: Drug Development Cases Leading by Example.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Sachs; Kapil Mayawala; Satvik Gadamsetty; Soonmo Peter Kang; Dinesh P de Alwis
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 9.  A survey of new oncology drug approvals in the USA from 2010 to 2015: a focus on optimal dose and related postmarketing activities.

Authors:  Dan Lu; Tong Lu; Mark Stroh; Richard A Graham; Priya Agarwal; Luna Musib; Chi-Chung Li; Bert L Lum; Amita Joshi
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  2016-01-25       Impact factor: 3.333

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.