Risk of serious toxicity in 1181 patients treated in phase I clinical trials of predominantly targeted anticancer drugs: The M. D. anderson cancer center experience

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 23, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 1963-1967

  Wheler, J J ^a   Tsimberidou, A M ^a   Hong, D S ^a   Naing, A ^a   Falchook, G S ^a   Fu, S ^a   Moulder, S ^a   Stephen, B ^a   Wen, S ^a   Kurzrock, R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Chemotherapeutics; Phase I; Predictive factors; Targeted therapies; Toxicity

Indexed keywords

ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITOR; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CYTOTOXIC AGENT; DASATINIB; HISTONE DEACETYLASE INHIBITOR;

ACUTE KIDNEY FAILURE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ADVANCED CANCER; AGED; ANEMIA; ANGINA PECTORIS; ANOREXIA; ANUS TUMOR; APPENDIX TUMOR; ARTICLE; ATAXIA; BILE DUCT CARCINOMA; BLEEDING; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER CENTER; CANCER OF UNKNOWN PRIMARY SITE; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM DISEASE; CHEMOTHERAPY INDUCED EMESIS; CHILD; COLON TUMOR; CONGESTIVE HEART FAILURE; DEHYDRATION; DIARRHEA; DRUG ERUPTION; DRUG INDUCED HEADACHE; DYSARTHRIA; DYSPNEA; ESOPHAGUS TUMOR; FATIGUE; FEMALE; FEMALE GENITAL TRACT TUMOR; GASTROINTESTINAL DISEASE; GASTROINTESTINAL TUMOR; HEAD AND NECK TUMOR; HEART ARRHYTHMIA; HEART DISEASE; HEART INFARCTION; HEMATOLOGIC DISEASE; HEMATOLOGIC MALIGNANCY; HEMATURIA; HUMAN; HYPOKALEMIA; HYPONATREMIA; HYPOPHOSPHATEMIA; HYPOTENSION; INFECTION; INTESTINE PERFORATION; KIDNEY DISEASE; KIDNEY FAILURE; LIVER TUMOR; LUNG DISEASE; LYMPHOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MELANOMA; MENTAL HEALTH; METABOLIC DISORDER; MOLECULARLY TARGETED THERAPY; MORTALITY; MUCOSA INFLAMMATION; NAUSEA; NEUROENDOCRINE TUMOR; NEUTROPENIA; PAIN; PANCREAS TUMOR; PERICARDIAL EFFUSION; PERITONEUM TUMOR; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PLEURA EFFUSION; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RECTUM TUMOR; SARCOMA; SCHOOL CHILD; SEIZURE; SIDE EFFECT; SMALL INTESTINE TUMOR; STOMACH TUMOR; SYNCOPE; THROMBOCYTOPENIA; THROMBOEMBOLISM; THYROID TUMOR; UNITED STATES; UROGENITAL TRACT TUMOR; VASCULAR DISEASE;

EID: 84864939835     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mds027     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts & Figures 2011. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2011.
2. Horstmann E, McCabe MS, Grochow L et al. Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 895-904.
3. Kurzrock R, Benjamin RS. Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, revisited. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 930-932.
4. Itoh K, Sasaki Y, Miyata Y et al. Therapeutic response and potential pitfalls in phase I clinical trials of anticancer agents conducted in Japan. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1994; 34: 451-454.
5. Estey E, Hoth D, Simon R et al. Therapeutic response in phase I trials of antineoplastic agents. Cancer Treat Rep 1986; 70: 1105-1115.
6. Decoster G, Stein G, Holdener EE. Responses and toxic deaths in phase I clinical trials. Ann Oncol 1990; 1: 175-181.
7. 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: 287-295.
8. Roberts TG, Jr, Goulart BH, Squitieri L et al. Trends in the risks and benefits to patients with cancer participating in phase 1 clinical trials. JAMA 2004; 292: 2130-2140.
9. Von Hoff DD, Turner J. Response rates, duration of response, and dose response effects in phase I studies of antineoplastics. Invest New Drugs 1991; 9: 115-122.
10. Tkaczuk KH. Review of the contemporary cytotoxic and biologic combinations available for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Clin Ther 2009; 31(Pt 2): 2273-2289.
11. Randall LM, Monk BJ. Bevacizumab toxicities and their management in ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2010; 117: 497-504.
12. Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 3.0. 2006; DCTD, NCI, NIH, DHHS March 31, 2003 http://ctep.cancer.gov (31 December 2008, date last accessed).
13. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 1982; 5: 649-655.
14. Arkenau HT, Barriuso J, Olmos D et al. Prospective validation of a prognostic score to improve patient selection for oncology phase I trials. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 2692-2696.
15. Han C, Braybrooke JP, Deplanque G et al. Comparison of prognostic factors in patients in phase I trials of cytotoxic drugs vs new noncytotoxic agents. Br J Cancer 2003; 89: 1166-1171.
16. Vemulapalli S, Chintala L, Tsimberidou AM et al. Clinical outcomes and factors predicting development of venous thromboembolic complications in patients with advanced refractory cancer in a phase I clinic: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Am J Hematol 2009; 84: 408-413.
17. Arkenau HT, Olmos D, Ang JE et al. Clinical outcome and prognostic factors for patients treated within the context of a phase I study: the Royal Marsden Hospital experience. Br J Cancer 2008; 98: 1029-1033.
18. Jain RK, Lee JJ, Hong D et al. Phase I oncology studies: evidence that in the era of targeted therapies patients on lower doses do not fare worse. Clin Cancer Res 2010; 16: 1289-1297.
19. Bachelot T, Ray-Coquard I, Catimel G et al. Multivariable analysis of prognostic factors for toxicity and survival for patients enrolled in phase I clinical trials. Ann Oncol 2000; 11: 151-156.
20. Rodon J, Perez J, Kurzrock R. Combining targeted therapies: practical issues to consider at the bench and bedside. Oncologist 2010; 15: 37-50.
21. Agrawal M, Emanuel EJ. Ethics of phase 1 oncology studies: reexamining the arguments and data. JAMA 2003; 290: 1075-1082.
22. Stewart DJ, Whitney SN, Kurzrock R. Equipoise lost: ethics, costs, and the regulation of cancer clinical research. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 2925-2935.
23. Stewart DJ, Kurzrock R. Cancer: the road to Amiens. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 328-333.