Clinical trial designs for targeted agents

Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America

Volumn 16, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 1287-1305

  Ma, Brigette B Y ^a   Britten, Carolyn D ^b   Siu, Lillian L ^a  

^a PRINCESS MARGARET HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; BEVACIZUMAB; CYTARABINE; ERLOTINIB; GEFITINIB; IMATINIB; INTERFERON; MARIMASTAT; PROTEIN TYROSINE KINASE INHIBITOR; SEMAXANIB; TANOMASTAT; TRASTUZUMAB; BIOLOGICAL MARKER; ENZYME INHIBITOR; MATRIX METALLOPROTEINASE; ORGANIC COMPOUND; PIPERAZINE DERIVATIVE; PROTEIN TYROSINE KINASE; PYRIMIDINE DERIVATIVE; TUMOR PROTEIN;

ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; CANCER; CLINICAL TRIAL; DATA ANALYSIS; DIARRHEA; DOSE CALCULATION; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG INDICATION; DRUG INDUCED DISEASE; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG RESPONSE; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG TARGETING; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; METHODOLOGY; MUCOSA INFLAMMATION; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SELECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TITRIMETRY; TREATMENT INDICATION; TREATMENT PLANNING; ANIMAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG ANTAGONISM; DRUG DESIGN; MOUSE; NEOPLASM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RAT;

ANIMALS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; CLINICAL TRIALS; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE III; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG SCREENING ASSAYS, ANTITUMOR; ENZYME INHIBITORS; HUMANS; MATRIX METALLOPROTEINASES; MICE; NEOPLASM PROTEINS; NEOPLASMS; ORGANIC CHEMICALS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT SELECTION; PIPERAZINES; PROTEIN-TYROSINE KINASES; PYRIMIDINES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; RATS;

EID: 0036817826     PISSN: 08898588     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0889-8588(02)00045-X     Document Type: Review

References (78)

1. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 2000;100:57-70.
2. Schilsky RL. End points in cancer clinical trials and the drug approval process. Clin Cancer Res 2002;8:935-8.
3. Eisenhauer EA. Phase I and II trials of novel anti-cancer agents: Endpoints, efficacy and existentialism. Ann Oncol 1998;9:1047-52.
4. Gelmon KA, Eisenhauer EA, Harris AL, et al. Anticancer agents targeting signaling molecules and cancer cell environment: Challenges for drug development? J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91: 1281-7.
5. Korn EL, Arbuck SG, Pluda JM, et al. Clinical trial designs for cytostatic agents: Are new approaches needed? J Clin Oncol 2001;19:265-72.
6. Tan AR, Swain SM. Novel agents: Clinical trial design. Semin Oncol 2001;28:148-53.
7. Von Hoff DD. There are no bad anticancer agents, only bad clinical trial designs-twenty-first Richard and Hinda Rosenthal Foundation Award Lecture. Clin Cancer Res 1998;4:1079-86.
8. Toppmeyer D. Phase I trial design and methodology. In: Teicher B, editor. Anticancer Drug Development Guide. Preclinical Screening, Clinical Trials and Approval. Vol. 3. Totowa, New Jersey: Humana Press; 1997. p. 227-47.
9. Arbuck SG. Workshop on phase I study design. Ninth NCI/EORTC New Drug Development Symposium, Amsterdam. Ann Oncol 1996;7:567-73.
10. Mendelsohn JM, Baselga J. The EGF receptor family as targets for cancer therapy. Oncogene 2000;19:6550-65.
11. Ranson M, Hammond LA, Ferry D, et al. ZD1839, a selective oral epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is well tolerated and active in patients with solid, malignant tumors: Results of a phase I trial. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:2240-50.
12. Betensky RA, Louis DN, Cairncross JG. Influence of unrecognized molecular heterogeneity on randomized clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:2495-9.
13. Dowlati A, Haaga J, Remick SC, et al. Sequential tumor biopsies in early phase clinical trials of anticancer agents for pharmacodynamic evaluation. Clin Can Res 2001;7:2971-6.
14. Sebti SM, Hamilton AD. Farnesyltrallsferase and geranylgeranyltransferase I inhibitors and cancer therapy: Lessons from mechanism and bench-to-bedside translational studies. Oncogene 2000;19:6584-93.
15. Erlichman C, Adjei AA, Alberts SR, et al. Phase I study of the matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor, BAY 12-9566. Ann Oncol 2001;12:389-95.
16. Hidalgo M, Eckhardt SG. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors: How can we optimized their development? Ann Oncol 2001;12:285-7.
17. Hidalgo M, Eckhardt SG. Development of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors in cancer therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:178-93.
18. Holden SN, Morrow M, O'Bryant C, et al. Correlative biological assays used to guide dose escalation in a phase I study of the antiangiogenic aVβP3 and aVβP5 integrin antagonist EMD 121974 (EMD) [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
19. Albanell J, Rojo F, Averbuch S, et al. Pharmacodynamic studies of the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor ZD1839 in skin from cancer patients: Histopathologic and molecular consequences of receptor inhibition. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:110-24.
20. Figg WD, Dahut W, Duray P, et al. A randomized phase II trial of thalidomide, an angiogenesis inhibitor, in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2001;7: 1888-93.
21. Sinibaldi V, Carducci MM, Denmeade S, et al. A randomized, double-blinded, phase I/II study of 3 doses of Marimastat® in patients with hormone naïve, biochemically relapsed (MO) prostate cancer [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2002;21.
22. Anderson H, Price P, Blomley M, et al. Measuring changes in human tumour vasculature in response to therapy using functional imaging techniques. Br J Cancer 2001;85:1085-93.
23. Neeman M, Provenzale JM, Dewhirst MW. Magnetic resonance imaging applications in the evaluation of tumor angiogenesis. Semin Radiat Oncol 2001;11:70-82.
24. Albanell J, Rojo F, Baselga J. Pharmacodynamic studies with the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor ZD 1839. Semin Oncol 2001;28:56-66.
25. Smith TL, Lee JJ, Kantarjian HM, et al. Design and results of phase I cancer clinical trials: Three-year experience at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:287-95.
26. Eisenhauer EA, O'Dwyer PJ, Christian M, Humphrey JS. Phase I clinical trial design in cancer drug development. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:684-92.
27. Collins JM, Grieshaber CK, Chabner BA. Pharmacologically guided phase I trials based upon preclinical development. J Natl Cancer Inst 1990;82:1321-6.
28. Goodman SN, Zahurak ML, Piantadosi S. Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med 1995;14:1149-61.
29. O' Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method: A practical design for phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 1990;46:33-48.
30. Simon R, Freidlin B, Rubinstein L, et al. Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical testing in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989;89:1138-47.
31. Siu LL, Rowinsky EK, Clark GM, et al. Dose escalation using the modified continual reassessment method (MCRM) in phase I clinical trials: A review of the San Antonio experience. Ann Oncol 1992;2(Suppl 2):127-30.
32. Nagamura F, Collins J, Kobayashi K, Hirschfeld S. Comparative review of oncology phase I dose escalation designs of new molecular entities [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
33. Simon R. New statistical designs for clinical trials of immunomodulating agents. In: Kresing TF, editor. Immune Modulating Agents. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1998.
34. Lathia C, Shah A, Sundaresan P. Effect of age and gender on the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of BAY 12-9566 in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 2001;41:764-9.
35. Millar AW, Brown PD, Moore J, Lynch KP, et al. Results of single and repeat dose studies of the oral matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor marimastat in healthy male volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1998;45:21-6.
36. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:205-16.
37. Kramar A, Potvin D, Hill C. Multistage designs for phase II clinical trials: Statistical issues in cancer research. Br J Cancer 1996;74:1317-20.
38. Sekine I, Tamura T, Kunitoh H, et al. Progressive disease rate as a surrogate endpoint of phase II trials for non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol 1999;10:731-3.
39. Mick R, Crowley JJ, Carroll RJ. Phase II clinical trial design for noncytotoxic anticancer agents for which time to disease progression is the primary endpoint. Control Clin Trials 2000;21: 343-59.
40. Morin MJ. From oncogene to drug: Development of small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors as anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic agents. Oncogene 2000;19:6574-83.
41. Zee B, Melnychuk D, Dancey J, et al. Multinomial phase II cancer trials incorporating response and early progression. J Biopharm Stat 1999;9:351-63.
42. Dent S, Zee B, Dancey J, et al. Application of a new multinomial phase II stopping rule using response and early progression. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:785-91.
43. Fleming TR. One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 1982; 38:143-51.
44. Gehan EA. The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a followup trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chron Dis 1961;13:346-53.
45. Freidlin B, Dancey J, Korn EL, Zee B, Eisenhauer E. Multinomial phase II trial designs. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:599.
46. Douillard J, Giaccone G, Horai T, et al. Improvement in disease-related symptoms and quality of life in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with ZD1839 ('Iressa') (IDEAL 1) [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
47. Natale RB, Skarin AT, Maddox AM, et al. Improvement in symptoms and quality of life for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients receiving ZD1839 ('Iressa') in IDEAL [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
48. Simon R, Wittes RE, Ellenberg SS. Randomized phase II clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rep 1985; 69:1375-81.
49. Liu PY, LeBlanc M, Desai M. False positive rates of randomized phase II designs. Control Clin Trials 1999;20:343-52.
50. Atkins MB, Hidalgo M, Stadler W, et al. A randomized double-blind phase 2 study of intravenous CCI-779 administered weekly to patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
51. Collie MA, Gonzalez R, Smylie M, et al. Phase II, parallel-design study of the matrix metal-loproteinase (MMP) inhibitor prinomastat in combination with weekly paclitaxel in patients with metastatic melanoma [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
52. Thall PF, Simon R, Ellenberg SS. Two stage selection and testing designs for comparative clinical trials. Biometrika 1988;75:303-10.
53. Thall PF, Simon R, Ellenberg SS. A two-stage design for choosing among several experimental treatments and a control in clinical trials. Biometrics 1989;45:537-48.
54. Strauss N, Simon R. Investigating a sequence of randomized phase II trials to discover promising treatments. Stat Med 1995;14:1479-89.
55. Simon R, Thall PF, Ellenberg SS. New designs for the selection of treatments to be tested in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 1994;13:417-29.
56. Dahut WL, Arlen PM, Gulley J, et al. A randomized phase II trial of docetaxel plus thalidomide in androgen-independent prostate cancer [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
57. Cuzick J, Edwards R, Segnan N. Adjusting for non-compliance and contamination in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 1997;16:1017-29.
58. Amery W, Dony J. A clinical trial design avoiding undue placebo treatment. J Clin Pharmacol 1975;15:674-9.
59. Foster NL, Petersen RC, Gracon SI, Lewis K. An enriched-population, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of tacrine and lecithin in Alzheimer's disease. The Tacrine 970-6 Study Group. Dementia 1996;7:260-6.
60. Kopec JA, Abrahamowiczm M, Esdaile J. Randomized discontinuation trials: Utility and efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol 1993;46:959-71.
61. Leber PD, Davis CS. Threats to the validity of clinical trials employing enrichment strategies for sample selection. Control Clin Trials 1998;19:178-87.
62. Matain MJ, Stadler WM. Clinical trial designs for cytostatic agents. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3145.
63. Fazzati M, Heller G, Scher HI. The phase II/III transition. Toward the proof of efficacy in cancer clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:360-8.
64. Schaid DJ. Optimal two-stage screening designs for survival comparisons. Biometrika 1990;77:507-13.
65. Scher HI, Heller G. Picking the winners in a sea of plenty. Clin Cancer Res 2002;8:400-4.
66. Druker B. STI571 (Gleevec/Glivec, imatinib) versus interferon + cytarabine as initial therapy for patients with CML: Results of a randomized study [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002; 21:1a.
67. Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpress HER2. N Engl J Med 2001;344: 783-91.
68. Deplanque G, Harris AL. Anti-angiogenic agents: Clinical trial design and therapies in development. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:1713-24.
69. Zucker S, Cao J, Chen W. Critical appraisal of the use of metalloproteinase inhibitors in cancer treatment. Oncogene 2000;19:6642-50.
70. Schwartzberg LS. Clinical experience with edrecolomab: A monoclonal antibody therapy for colorectal carcinoma. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2001;40:17-24.
71. Mauro MJ, O'Dwyer M, Heinrich MC, Druker BJ. STI571: A paradigm of new agents for cancer therapeutics. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:325-34.
72. Peng B, Hayes M, Druker B, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of STI571 in a phase I trial in chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) patients [2000] [abstract]. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 2000;41.
73. Sawyers CL, Hochhaus A, Feldman E, et al. Imatinib induces hematologic and cytogenetic responses in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia in myeloid blast crisis: Results of a phase II study. Blood 2002;99:3530-9.
74. Habeck M. FDA licenses imatinib mesylate for CML. Lancet Oncol 2002;3:6.
75. Demetri GD, Rankin C, Fletcher C, et al. Phase III dose-randomized study of imatinib mesylate (Gleevec, STI571) for GIST: Intergroup S0033 early results [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2002;21.
76. Hess KR, Abbruzzese JL. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibition of pancreatic cancer: Matching mechanism of action to clinical trial design. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3445-6.
77. Hirte H, Goel R, Major P, et al. A phase I dose escalation study of the matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor BAY 12-9566 administered orally in patients with advanced solid tumours. Ann Oncol 2000;11:1579-84.
78. Hirte HW, Vergote IB, Jeffrey JR, et al. An international multicentre phase III study of BAY 12-9566 versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer responsive to primary surgery/paclitaxel + platinum containing chemotherapy [abstract]. Proc Am Clin Oncol 2001;21.