Phase II studies on prostate cancer

Urology

Volumn 49, Issue 4 SUPPL., 1997, Pages 3-14

  Schröder, Fritz H ^a   Norming, Ulf ^b,c   Blumenstein, Brent A ^d   Busch, Christer ^e   Van Glabbeke, Martine ^f   HØisÆter, Per Åge ^g   Johansson, Jan Erik ^h   Tribukait, Bernhard ⁱ  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b STOCKHOLM SÖDER HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^d Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^e UPPSALA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^f EORTC DATA CENTER   (Belgium)

^g HAUKELAND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^h ÖREBRO MEDICAL CENTRE HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

ⁱ KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; DRUG EFFICACY; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER;

CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II; DECISION TREES; FORECASTING; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT SELECTION; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RESEARCH DESIGN; THERAPEUTICS;

EID: 0342684470     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00160-X     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Häggman M, Norberg M, de la Torre M, Fritjofsson Å, and Busch C: Characterization of localized prostatic cancer: distribution, grading and pT-staging in radical prostatectomy specimens. Scand J Urol Nephrol 27: 7-13, 1993.
2. Kleer E, Larson-Keller JJ, Zincke H, and Oesterling JE: Ability of preoperative serum prostatespecific antigen value to predict pathologic stage and DNA ploidy. Influence of clinical stage and tumor grade. Urology 41(3): 207-216, 1993.
3. Partin AW, Yoo J, Carter B, Pearson JD, Chan DW, Epstein JI, and Walsh PC: The use of prostate specific antigen, clinical stage and Gleason score to predict pathological stage in men localized prostate cancer. J Urol 150: 110-114, 1993.
4. Sylvester RJ, Denis L, and de Voogt HJ: The importance of prognostic factors in the interpretation of metastatic prostate cancer trials Abstr 1190. American Urological Association, 1996, 608A.
5. Sridhara R, Eisenberger MA, Sinibaldi VJ, Reyno LM, and Egorin MJ: Evaluation of prostate-specific antigen as a surrogate marker for response of hormone-refractory prostate cancer to suramin therapy. J Clin Oncol 13: 2944-2953, 1995.
6. Trimble EL, Carter CL, Cain D, Freidlin B, Ungerleider RS, and Friedman MA: Representation of older patients in cancer treatment trials. Cancer 74(suppl 7, Oct. 1): 2208-2214, 1994.
7. Jones WG, Fosså SD, Bono AV, Croies JJ, Stoter G, de Pauw M, Sylvester R, and members of the EORTC Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Co-operative Group: Mitomycin-C in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer: report on an EORTC phase II study. World J Urol 4: 182-185, 1986.
8. Newling DW, Fosså SD, Tunn UW, Kurth KH, de Pauw M, and Sylvester R: Mitomycin C versus estramustine in the treatment of hormone resistant metastatic prostate cancer: the final analysis of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, genitourinary group prospective randomized phase III study (30865). J Urol 150(6): 1840-1844, 1993.
9. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer: Evaluation criteria, scoring scales and instruments, in Therasse P (ed): A Practical Guide to EORTC Studies. EORTC, Brussels, 1996.
10. Schröder FH and the European Organization on Research on Treatment of Cancer Urological Group: Treatment response criteria for prostatic cancer. Prostate 5: 181-191, 1984.
11. Newling DW: Criteria of response to treatment in advanced prostatic cancer, in Furr BJA, and Denis L (Eds): Baillières Clinical Oncology, Volume 2. London: Baillière Tindall, 1988, pp 505-519.
12. Yagoda A, Watson RC, Natale RB, Barzell W, Sogani P, Grabstald H, and Whitmore WF: A critical analysis of response criteria in patients with prostatic cancer treated with CIS-Diamminedichloride Platinum II. Cancer 44: 1553-1562, 1979.
13. Carpentier PJ, Schröder FH, and Schmitz PM: Transrectal ultrasonometry of the prostate: the prognostic relevance of volume changes under endocrine management. World J Urol 4: 159-162, 1986.
14. Jones WG, Bono AV, Verbaes A, de Pauw M, and Sylvester R: Can the primary tumor be used as a sole parameter for response in phase II chemotherapy studies in metastatic prostate cancer? An EORTC Genito-Urinary Group report. World J Urol 4: 176-181, 1986.
15. Sneller ZW, Hop WCJ, Carpentier PJ, and Schröder FH: Prognosis and prostatic volume changes during endocrine management of prostate cancer: a longitudinal study. J Urol 147: 962-966, 1992.
16. Okihara K, Watanabe M, Saitoh M, Ohe H, and Watanabe H: Kinetic analysis of focal hypoechoic lesion in the prostate treated by castration. Prostate 24(5): 252-256, 1994.
17. Murphy GP, Busch C, Abrahamsson P-A, Epstein JI, McNeal JE, Miller GJ, Mostofi FK, Nagle RB, Nordling S, Parkinson C, and Sesterhenn IA: Histopathology of localized prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol 162(suppl): 7-42, 1994.
18. WHO Handbook for Reporting Results of Cancer Treatment. WHO Offset Publication No 48. World Health Organization, Geneva, 1979.
19. Eisenberger MA, Simon R, O'Dwyer PJ, Wittes RE, and Friedman MA: A reevaluation of nonhormonal cytotoxic chemotherapy in the treatment of prostatic carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 3(6): 827-841, 1985.
20. Richards B, Sylvester R, de Pauw M, and the EORTC Urological Group: The clinical value of the serum acid phosphatase in carcinoma of the prostate, in Pavone-Macaluso M, and Smith PH (Eds): Cancer of the Prostate and the Kidney. New York, Plenum Press, 1983, pp 167.
21. Kadmon D, Thompson TC, Lynch GR, and Scardino PT: Elevated plasma chromogranin-A concentrations in prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 146: 358-361, 1991.
22. van Steenbrugge GJ, Blankenstein MA, Bolt-de-Vries J, Romijn JC, Schröder FH, and Vihko P: Effect of hormone treatment on prostatic acid phosphatase in a serially transplantable human prostatic adenocarcinoma (PC82). J Urol 129: 630-633, 1993.
23. Thalmann GN, Sikes RA, Chang SM, Johnston DA, von Eshenbach AC, and Chung LWK: Suramin-induced decrease in prostate-speicific antigen expression with no effect on tumor growth in the LNCaP model of human prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 88: 794-801, 1996.
24. Eisenberger MA, and Nelson WG: How much can we rely on the level of prostate-specific antigen as an end point for evaluation of clinical trials? A word of caution. J Natl Cancer Inst 88: 779-781, 1996.
25. Storlie JA, Buckner JC, Wiseman GA, Burch PA, and Hartmann LC et al.: Prostate specific antigen levels and clinical response to low dose dexamethasone for hormonerefractory metastatic prostate carcinoma. Cancer 76: 96-100, 1995.
26. Seckin B, Anthony CT, Murphy B, and Steiner MS: Can prostate-specific antigen be used as a valid end point to determine efficacy of chemotherapy for advanced prostate cancer? World J Urol 14: S26-29, 1996.
27. Kelly WM, Scher HI, Mazumdar M, Vramis V, Schwartz M, and Fosså S: Prostate specific antigen as a measure of desease outcome in metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 11: 607-615, 1993.
28. Tannock IF, Osoba D, Stockler MR, Ernst DS, Neville AJ, Moore MJ, Armitage GR, Wilson JJ, Venner PM, Coppin CML, and Murphy KC: Chemotherapy with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisone alone for symptomatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer: a Canadian randomized trial with palliative endpoints. J Clin Oncol 14(6): 1756-1764, 1996.
29. Clinton B, and Gore A: Reinventing the Regulation of Cancer Drugs. Washington, DC, US Food and Drug Administration, 1996.
30. Commission of the European Communities: Good clinical practice for trials on medicinal products in the Euorpean Community, III: 3976/88-EN (final), in The Rules Governing Medicinal Products in the European Community, Volume 1. Catalog CB-55-89-706-EN-C, ISBN 92-825-9563-3, Brussels, Commision of the European Communities, 1989.
31. Byar DP: The Veterans Administration Cooperative Urological research groups studies of cancer of the prostate. Cancer 32;1126-1130, 1973.
32. Delamothe T: Reporting adverse drug reactions. Br Med J 304: 465, 1992.
33. Edwards R, and Biriell C: Harmonisation in pharmacovigilance. Drug Safety 10(2): 93-102, 1994.
34. International Committee on Harmonisation: Clinical safety data management: definitions and standards for expedited reporting (ICH topic E 2 A), in The Rules Governing Medicinal Products in the European Community, Volume III: Guidelines on the Quality, Safety and Efficacy of Medicinal Products for Human Use, Part II (111/5382/96). Brussels, Commission of the European Communities, 1996, pp 497-502.
35. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, and Winkler A: Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 47; 207-214, 1981.
36. Kramar A, Potvin D, and Hill C: Multistage designs for phase II clinical trials : statistical issues in cancer research. Br J Cancer 74: 1317-1320, 1996.
37. Mariani L, and Marubini E: Design and analysis of phase II cancer trials: a review of statistical methods and guidelines for medical researchers. Int Stat Rev 64: 61-88, 1996.
38. Gehan EA: The determination of the number of patients required in a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chron Dis 13: 346-353, 1961.
39. Simon R: Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 10: 1-10, 1989.
40. Fleming TR: One sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 38: 143-151, 1982.
41. Green SJ, and Dahlberg S: Planned versus attained design in phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 11: 853-862, 1992.
42. Ensign GL, Gehan EA, Kamen DS, and Thall PF: An optimal three-stage design for phase II clinical trials. Stat Med 13: 1727-1736, 1994.
43. Bryant J, and Day R: Incorporating toxicity considerations into the design of two-stage phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 51: 1372-1383, 1995.
44. Dent S, Zee B, and Dansey J: Design of phase II clinical trials: stopping rule using response and early progression (abst). Ann Oncol 7(suppl 1): abstract 475, 1996.
45. Sylvester R, and Staquet M: Design of phase II trials in clinical trials in cancer using decision theory. Cancer Treat Rep 64: 519-524, 1980.
46. Thall PF, Simon RM, and Estey EH: New statistical strategy for monitoring safety and efficacy in single-arm clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 14: 296-303, 1996.
47. Clark JW, and Chabner BA: Suramin and prostate cancer: where do we go from here? J Clin Oncol 13(9): 2155-2157, 1995.