Phase II stopping rules that employ response rates and early progression

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 26, Issue 22, 2008, Pages 3715-3720

  Goffin, John R ^a   Tu, Dongsheng ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER RESEARCH; DRUG ACTIVITY; PARAMETER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIMULATION; TREATMENT RESPONSE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DISEASE COURSE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASM; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; THEORETICAL MODEL; TIME; TREATMENT FAILURE;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II AS TOPIC; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DISEASE PROGRESSION; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NEOPLASMS; RESEARCH DESIGN; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT FAILURE;

EID: 49249102416     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.1044     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG: The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 22:151-185, 2003
2. Booth B, Glassman R, Ma P: Oncology's trials. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2:609-610, 2003
3. Goffin J, Baral S, Tu D, et al: Objective responses in patients with malignant melanoma or renal cell cancer in early clinical studies do not predict regulatory approval. Clin Cancer Res 11:5928-5934, 2005
4. DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG: Economics of new oncology drug development. J Clin Oncol 25:209-216, 2007
5. Buyse M, Thirion P, Carlson RW, et al: Relation between tumour response to first-line chemotherapy and survival in advanced colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis - Meta-Analysis Group in Cancer. Lancet 356:373-378, 2000
6. Graf W, Pahlman L, Bergstrom R, et al: The relationship between an objective response to chemotherapy and survival in advanced colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 70:559-563, 1994
7. Markman M: Why does a higher response rate to chemotherapy correlate poorly with improved survival? J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 119:700-701, 1993
8. Paesmans M, Sculier JP, Libert P, et al: Response to chemotherapy has predictive value for further survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: 10 years experience of the European Lung Cancer Working Party. Eur J Cancer 33:2326-2332, 1997
9. Burris HA III, Moore MJ, Andersen J, et al: Improvements in survival and clinical benefit with gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreas cancer: A randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 15:2403-2413, 1997
10. Shepherd FA, Dancey J, Ramlau R, et al: Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 18:2095-2103, 2000
11. Cesano A, Lane SR, Poulin R, et al: Stabilization of disease as a useful predictor of survival following second-line chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer and ovarian cancer patients. Int J Oncol 15:1233-1238, 1999
12. Howell A, Mackintosh J, Jones M, et al: The definition of the 'no change' category in patients treated with endocrine therapy and chemotherapy for advanced carcinoma of the breast. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 24:1567-1572, 1988
13. Murray N, Coppin C, Coldman A, et al: Drug delivery analysis of the Canadian multicenter trial in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 12:2333-2339, 1994
14. Rapp E, Pater JL, Willan A, et al: Chemotherapy can prolong survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: Report of a Canadian multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 6:633-641, 1988
15. Roberts TG Jr, Lynch TJ Jr, Chabner BA: The phase III trial in the era of targeted therapy: Unraveling the "go or no go" decision. J Clin Oncol 21:3683-3695, 2003
16. Fleming TR: One-sample multiple testing procedure for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 38:143-151, 1982
17. Gehan EA: The determination of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent. J Chronic Dis 13:346-353, 1961
18. Simon R: Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 10:1-10, 1989
19. Zee B, Melnychuk D, Dancey J, et al: Multinomial phase II cancer trials incorporating response and early progression. J Biopharm Stat 9:351-363, 1999
20. Freidlin B, Dancey J, Korn EL, et al: Multinomial phase II trial designs. J Clin Oncol 20:599, 2002
21. Chang MN, Devidas M, Anderson J: One- and two-stage designs for phase II window studies. Stat Med 26:2604-2614, 2007
22. 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 19:785-791, 2001