Clinical trials in the era of personalized oncology

CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Volumn 61, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 365-381

  Maitland, Michael L ^a   Schilsky, Richard L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; CAPECITABINE; CRIZOTINIB; DASATINIB; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ERLOTINIB; FLUOROURACIL; FOLINIC ACID; IMATINIB; METHOTREXATE; NILOTINIB; PACLITAXEL; PLACEBO; TAMOXIFEN; TRASTUZUMAB; VELIPARIB; VEMURAFENIB;

ADJUVANT THERAPY; ADVANCED CANCER; ANTINEOPLASTIC ACTIVITY; BREAST CANCER; BREAST METASTASIS; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COLORECTAL CANCER; DATA ANALYSIS; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG ELIMINATION; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; DRUG SPECIFICITY; DRUG TARGETING; ESOPHAGEAL ADENOCARCINOMA; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENE MUTATION; GENE SEQUENCE; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC RISK; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GOLD STANDARD; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MELANOMA; MOLECULAR DIAGNOSIS; MOLECULARLY TARGETED THERAPY; ONCOLOGY; PANCREAS CANCER; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; RADIATION DOSE; REVIEW; RISK REDUCTION; STOMACH ADENOCARCINOMA; STUDY DESIGN; TREATMENT PLANNING; TUMOR BIOPSY; TUMOR GROWTH;

ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL, HUMANIZED; ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; GENOME, HUMAN; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALIZED MEDICINE; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; NEOPLASMS; PACLITAXEL; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 81355133688     PISSN: 00079235     EISSN: 15424863     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3322/caac.20135     Document Type: Review

References (96)

1. Schilsky RL,. Personalizing cancer care: American Society of Clinical Oncology presidential address 2009. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 3725-3730.
2. Leaf C,. Why we're losing the war on cancer (and how to win it). Fortune. 2004; 149: 76-82, 84-86, 88 passim.
3. Porter R,. Offering resistance. New York Times Book Review. June 29, 1997.
4. Kola I, Landis J,. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2004; 3: 711-715.
5. DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG,. Economics of new oncology drug development. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 209-216.
6. Woodcock J,. The prospects for "personalized medicine" in drug development and drug therapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007; 81: 164-169.
7. Fisher B, Bauer M, Margolese R, et al. Five-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and segmental mastectomy with or without radiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1985; 312: 665-673.
8. Fisher B, Redmond C, Poisson R, et al. Eight-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1989; 320: 822-828.
9. Holmes FA, Walters RS, Theriault RL, et al. Phase II trial of taxol, an active drug in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991; 83: 1797-1805.
10. Reichman BS, Seidman AD, Crown JP, et al. Paclitaxel and recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as initial chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1993; 11: 1943-1951.
11. Seidman AD, Tiersten A, Hudis C, et al. Phase II trial of paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion as initial and salvage chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1995; 13: 2575-2581.
12. Nabholtz JM, Gelmon K, Bontenbal M, et al. Multicenter, randomized comparative study of two doses of paclitaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1996; 14: 1858-1867.
13. Henderson IC, Berry DA, Demetri GD, et al. Improved outcomes from adding sequential Paclitaxel but not from escalating doxorubicin dose in an adjuvant chemotherapy regimen for patients with node-positive primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 976-983.
14. Mamounas EP, Bryant J, Lembersky B, et al. Paclitaxel after doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide as adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-28. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 3686-3696.
15. Hayes DF, Thor AD, Dressler LG, et al. HER2 and response to paclitaxel in node-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357: 1496-1506.
16. Baselga J, Tripathy D, Mendelsohn J, et al. Phase II study of weekly intravenous recombinant humanized anti-p185HER2 monoclonal antibody in patients with HER2/neu-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1996; 14: 737-744.
17. Cobleigh MA, Vogel CL, Tripathy D, et al. Multinational study of the efficacy and safety of humanized anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody in women who have HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer that has progressed after chemotherapy for metastatic disease. J Clin Oncol. 1999; 17: 2639-2648.
18. Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 783-792.
19. Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353: 1673-1684.
20. Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Bono P, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel or vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354: 809-820.
21. Buyse M,. Breaking from tradition in the design of phase II/III clinical trials. Paper presented at: American Society of Clinical Oncology 2005 Annual Meeting; May 13-17, 2005; Orlando, FL.
22. Sparano JA, Bernardo P, Stephenson P, et al. Randomized phase III trial of marimastat versus placebo in patients with metastatic breast cancer who have responding or stable disease after first-line chemotherapy: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group trial E2196. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 4683-4690.
23. Schilsky RL,. Target practice: oncology drug development in the era of genomic medicine. Clin Trials. 2007; 4: 163-166; discussion 173-177.
24. Paik S, Kim C, Wolmark N,. HER2 status and benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 1409-1411.
25. Freidlin B, McShane LM, Korn EL,. Randomized clinical trials with biomarkers: design issues. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010; 102: 152-160.
26. Janes H, Pepe MS, Bossuyt PM, Barlow WE,. Measuring the performance of markers for guiding treatment decisions. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 154: 253-259.
27. Jiang W, Freidlin B, Simon R,. Biomarker-adaptive threshold design: a procedure for evaluating treatment with possible biomarker-defined subset effect. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007; 99: 1036-1043.
28. Lazar AA, Cole BF, Bonetti M, Gelber RD,. Evaluation of treatment-effect heterogeneity using biomarkers measured on a continuous scale: subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 4539-4544.
29. Sargent DJ, Conley BA, Allegra C, Collette L,. Clinical trial designs for predictive marker validation in cancer treatment trials. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 2020-2027.
30. Song X, Pepe MS,. Evaluating markers for selecting a patient's treatment. Biometrics. 2004; 60: 874-883.
31. Bang YJ, Van Cutsem E, Feyereislova A, et al. Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010; 376: 687-697.
32. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001; 98: 10869-10874.
33. Nielsen TO, Hsu FD, Jensen K, et al. Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2004; 10: 5367-5374.
34. Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Ellis IO,. Basal-like breast cancer: a critical review. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 2568-2581.
35. Richardson AL, Wang ZC, De Nicolo A, et al. X chromosomal abnormalities in basal-like human breast cancer. Cancer Cell. 2006; 9: 121-132.
36. Toft DJ, Cryns VL,. Minireview: basal-like breast cancer: from molecular profiles to targeted therapies. Mol Endocrinol. 2011; 25: 199-211.
37. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 2817-2826.
38. Buyse M, Loi S, van't Veer L, et al. Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98: 1183-1192.
39. Sparano JA, Paik S,. Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 721-728.
40. Mook S, Bonnefoi H, Pruneri G, et al. Daily clinical practice of fresh tumour tissue freezing and gene expression profiling; logistics pilot study preceding the MINDACT trial. Eur J Cancer. 2009; 45: 1201-1208.
41. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA,. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011; 144: 646-674.
42. Baggerly K,. Disclose all data in publications. Nature. 2010; 467: 401.
43. Baggerly KA, Coombes KR,. What information should be required to support clinical "omics" publications [published online ahead of print March 1, 2011]? Clin Chem.
44. Baggerly KA, Coombes KR, Neeley ES,. Run batch effects potentially compromise the usefulness of genomic signatures for ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 1186-1187; author reply 1187-1188.
45. Leek JT, Scharpf RB, Bravo HC, et al. Tackling the widespread and critical impact of batch effects in high-throughput data. Nat Rev Genet. 2010; 11: 733-739.
46. Collins FS,. Shattuck lecture-medical and societal consequences of the Human Genome Project. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341: 28-37.
47. Gambaro G, Anglani F, D'Angelo A,. Association studies of genetic polymorphisms and complex disease. Lancet. 2000; 355: 308-311.
48. Hirschhorn JN, Altshuler D,. Once and again-issues surrounding replication in genetic association studies. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002; 87: 4438-4441.
49. Maitland ML, Ratain MJ, Cox NJ,. Interpreting P values in pharmacogenetic studies: a call for process and perspective. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 4513-4515.
50. Easton DF, Pooley KA, Dunning AM, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nature. 2007; 447: 1087-1093.
51. Gold B, Kirchhoff T, Stefanov S, et al. Genome-wide association study provides evidence for a breast cancer risk locus at 6q22.33. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105: 4340-4345.
52. Hunter DJ, Kraft P, Jacobs KB, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies alleles in FGFR2 associated with risk of sporadic postmenopausal breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2007; 39: 870-874.
53. Stacey SN, Manolescu A, Sulem P, et al. Common variants on chromosomes 2q35 and 16q12 confer susceptibility to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2007; 39: 865-869.
54. Stacey SN, Manolescu A, Sulem P, et al. Common variants on chromosome 5p12 confer susceptibility to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2008; 40: 703-706.
55. Zheng W, Long J, Gao YT, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies a new breast cancer susceptibility locus at 6q25.1. Nat Genet. 2009; 41: 324-328.
56. Wacholder S, Hartge P, Prentice R, et al. Performance of common genetic variants in breast-cancer risk models. N Engl J Med. 2010; 362: 986-993.
57. Zheng W, Wen W, Gao YT, et al. Genetic and clinical predictors for breast cancer risk assessment and stratification among Chinese women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010; 102: 972-981.
58. Schroth W, Goetz MP, Hamann U, et al. Association between CYP2D6 polymorphisms and outcomes among women with early stage breast cancer treated with tamoxifen. JAMA. 2009; 302: 1429-1436.
59. Jin Y, Desta Z, Stearns V, et al. CYP2D6 genotype, antidepressant use, and tamoxifen metabolism during adjuvant breast cancer treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005; 97: 30-39.
60. Gravitz L,. Technology Review: 10 Emerging Technologies 2009: $100 Genome. MIT Technol Rev. March/April 2009.
61. Barrett JS, Mondick JT, Narayan M, Vijayakumar K, Vijayakumar S,. Integration of modeling and simulation into hospital-based decision support systems guiding pediatric pharmacotherapy. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008; 8: 6.
62. Dombrowsky E, Jayaraman B, Narayan M, Barrett JS,. Evaluating performance of a decision support system to improve methotrexate pharmacotherapy in children and young adults with cancer. Ther Drug Monit. 2011; 33: 99-107.
63. Sharma MR, Maitland ML, Ratain MJ,. Other paradigms: better treatments are identified by better trials: the value of randomized phase II studies. Cancer J. 2009; 15: 426-430.
64. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009; 45: 228-247.
65. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D, et al. Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 2155-2161.
66. Day SE, Kettunen MI, Gallagher FA, et al. Detecting tumor response to treatment using hyperpolarized 13C magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. Nat Med. 2007; 13: 1382-1387.
67. Shields AF, Grierson JR, Dohmen BM, et al. Imaging proliferation in vivo with [F-18]FLT and positron emission tomography. Nat Med. 1998; 4: 1334-1336.
68. Dinan MA, Curtis LH, Hammill BG, et al. Changes in the use and costs of diagnostic imaging among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer, 1999-2006. JAMA. 2010; 303: 1625-1631.
69. Maitland ML,. Volumes to learn: advancing therapeutics with innovative computed tomography image data analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16: 4493-4495.
70. Bhattaram VA, Bonapace C, Chilukuri DM, et al. Impact of pharmacometric reviews on new drug approval and labeling decisions - A survey of 31 new drug applications submitted between 2005 and 2006. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007; 81: 213-221.
71. Gobburu JV, Lesko LJ,. Quantitative disease, drug, and trial models. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2009; 49: 291-301.
72. Gobburu JV, Marroum PJ,. Utilisation of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling and simulation in regulatory decision-making. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2001; 40: 883-892.
73. Claret L, Girard P, Hoff PM, et al. Model-based prediction of phase III overall survival in colorectal cancer on the basis of phase II tumor dynamics. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 4103-4108.
74. Wang Y, Sung C, Dartois C, et al. Elucidation of relationship between tumor size and survival in non-small-cell lung cancer patients can aid early decision making in clinical drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009; 86: 167-174.
75. Bruno R, Claret L,. On the use of change in tumor size to predict survival in clinical oncology studies: toward a new paradigm to design and evaluate phase II studies. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009; 86: 136-138.
76. Karrison TG, Maitland ML, Stadler WM, Ratain MJ,. Design of phase II cancer trials using a continuous endpoint of change in tumor size: application to a study of sorafenib and erlotinib in non small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007; 99: 1455-1461.
77. Mozley PD, Schwartz LH, Bendtsen C, Zhao B, Petrick N, Buckler AJ,. Change in lung tumor volume as a biomarker of treatment response: a critical review of the evidence. Ann Oncol. 2010; 21: 1751-1755.
78. Berg JM, Rogers ME, Lyster PM,. Systems biology and pharmacology. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010; 88: 17-19.
79. United States Food and Drug Administration, United States Department of Health and Human Services. Innovation or Stagnation: Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products. Washington, DC: United States Food and Drug Administration, United States Department of Health and Human Services; 2004.
80. Murthy VH, Krumholz HM, Gross CP,. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA. 2004; 291: 2720-2726.
81. Schilsky RL,. Accrual to cancer clinical trials in the era of molecular medicine. Sci Transl Med. 2011; 3: 75cm9.
82. Gross CP, Murthy V, Li Y, Kaluzny AD, Krumholz HM,. Cancer trial enrollment after state-mandated reimbursement. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004; 96: 1063-1069.
83. Dilts DM, Cheng SK, Crites JS, Sandler AB, Doroshow JH,. Phase III clinical trial development: a process of chutes and ladders. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16: 5381-5389.
84. Frei E, Holland J, Schneiderman M, et al. A comparative study of two regimens of combination chemotherapy in acute leukemia. Blood. 1958; 13: 1126-1148.
85. Maitland ML, Hudoba C, Snider KL, Ratain MJ,. Analysis of the yield of phase II combination therapy trials in medical oncology. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16: 5296-5302.
86. Agrawal M, Grady C, Fairclough DL, Meropol NJ, Maynard K, Emanuel EJ,. Patients' decision-making process regarding participation in phase I oncology research. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 4479-4484.
87. Catania C, De Pas T, Goldhirsch A, et al. Participation in clinical trials as viewed by the patient: understanding cultural and emotional aspects which influence choice. Oncology. 2008; 74: 177-187.
88. Ratain MJ,. Phase II oncology trials: let's be positive. Clin Cancer Res. 2005; 11: 5661-5662.
89. Pui CH, Evans WE,. Acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 1998; 339: 605-615.
90. Ratain MJ, Karrison TG,. Testing the wrong hypothesis in phase II oncology trials: there is a better alternative. Clin Cancer Res. 2007; 13: 781-782.
91. National Cancer Institute. caBIG® Mission and Goals. Available at:. Accessed September 21, 2011.
92. McClellan M, Benner J, Schilsky R, et al. An accelerated pathway for targeted cancer therapies. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011; 10: 79-80.
93. Bogaerts J, Cardoso F, Buyse M, et al. Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2006; 3: 540-551.
94. Barker AD, Sigman CC, Kelloff GJ, Hylton NM, Berry DA, Esserman LJ,. I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009; 86: 97-100.
95. van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van't Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 1999-2009.
96. Davis JC, Furstenthal L, Desai AA, et al. The microeconomics of personalized medicine: today's challenge and tomorrow's promise. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2009; 8: 279-286.