-
1
-
-
0031016857
-
Critical role of phase 1 clinical trials in cancer treatment
-
American Society of Clinical Oncology
-
Critical role of phase 1 clinical trials in cancer treatment. American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:853-9.
-
(1997)
J Clin Oncol.
, vol.15
, pp. 853-859
-
-
-
2
-
-
79955617684
-
Phase 1 trials of molecularly targeted agents: Should we pay more attention to late toxicities?
-
Postel-Vinay S, Gomez-Roca C, Molife LR, Anghan B, Levy A, Judson 1, et al. Phase I trials of molecularly targeted agents: should we pay more attention to late toxicities? J Clin Oncol. 2011;29: 1728-35.
-
(2011)
J Clin Oncol
, vol.29
, pp. 1728-1735
-
-
Postel-Vinay, S.1
Gomez-Roca, C.2
Molife, L.R.3
Anghan, B.4
Levy, A.5
Judson, I.6
-
3
-
-
79958774831
-
Phase 1 trials of molecular targeted therapies: Are we evaluating toxicities properly?
-
Soria JC. Phase 1 trials of molecular targeted therapies: are we evaluating toxicities properly? Eur J Cancer. 2011;47:1443-5.
-
(2011)
Eur J Cancer.
, vol.47
, pp. 1443-1445
-
-
Soria, J.C.1
-
4
-
-
84856032420
-
Nature and subjectivity of dose-limiting toxicities in contemporary phase 1 trials: Comparison of cytotoxic versus non-cytotoxic drugs
-
Penel N, Adenis A, Clisant S, Bonneterre J. Nature and subjectivity of dose-limiting toxicities in contemporary phase 1 trials: comparison of cytotoxic versus non-cytotoxic drugs. Invest New Drugs. 2011;29: 1414-9.
-
(2011)
Invest New Drugs
, vol.29
, pp. 1414-1419
-
-
Penel, N.1
Adenis, A.2
Clisant, S.3
Bonneterre, J.4
-
5
-
-
84866914428
-
The impact of nondrug-related toxicities on the estimation of the maximum tolerated dose in phase 1 trials
-
Iasonos A, Gounder M, Spriggs DR, Gerecitano JF, Hyman DM, Zohar S, et al. The impact of nondrug-related toxicities on the estimation of the maximum tolerated dose in phase I trials. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:5179-87.
-
(2012)
Clin Cancer Res.
, vol.18
, pp. 5179-5187
-
-
Iasonos, A.1
Gounder, M.2
Spriggs, D.R.3
Gerecitano, J.F.4
Hyman, D.M.5
Zohar, S.6
-
6
-
-
79958777006
-
Heterogeneity in the definition of dose-limiting toxicity in phase 1 cancer clinical trials of molecularly targeted agents: A review of the literature
-
Le Tourneau C, Razak AR, Gan HK, Pop S, Dieras V, Tresca P, et al.Heterogeneity in the definition of dose-limiting toxicity in phase I cancer clinical trials of molecularly targeted agents: A review of the literature. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47:1468-75.
-
(2011)
Eur J Cancer.
, vol.47
, pp. 1468-1475
-
-
Le Tourneau, C.1
Razak, A.R.2
Gan, H.K.3
Pop, S.4
Dieras, V.5
Tresca, P.6
-
7
-
-
72449133295
-
-
Administration UFaD, Available from:
-
Administration UFaD. FDA approved drug products. Available from: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/.
-
FDA Approved Drug Products
-
-
-
8
-
-
65549149873
-
Clinical benefit in phase I trials of novel molecularly targeted agents: Does dose matter?
-
Postel-Vinay S, Arkenau HT, Olmos D, Ang J, Barriuso J, Ashley S, et al. Clinical benefit in phase I trials of novel molecularly targeted agents: does dose matter? Br J Cancer. 2009;100:1373-8.
-
(2009)
Br J Cancer.
, vol.100
, pp. 1373-1378
-
-
Postel-Vinay, S.1
Arkenau, H.T.2
Olmos, D.3
Ang, J.4
Barriuso, J.5
Ashley, S.6
-
9
-
-
33748652419
-
What is the right dose? The elusive optimal biologic dose in phase 1 clinical trials
-
Adjei AA. What is the right dose? The elusive optimal biologic dose in phase 1 clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4054-5.
-
(2006)
J Clin Oncol.
, vol.24
, pp. 4054-4055
-
-
Adjei, A.A.1
-
10
-
-
43249124980
-
Dose selection in phase 1 studies: Why we should always go for the top
-
Sleijfer S, Wiemer E. Dose selection in phase I studies: why we should always go for the top. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1576-8.
-
(2008)
J Clin Oncol.
, vol.26
, pp. 1576-1578
-
-
Sleijfer, S.1
Wiemer, E.2
-
11
-
-
76749161498
-
Phase 1 oncology studies: Evidence that in the era of targeted therapies patients on lower doses do not fare worse
-
Jain RK, Lee JJ, Hong D, Markman M, Gong J, Naing A, et al. Phase 1 oncology studies: evidence that in the era of targeted therapies patients on lower doses do not fare worse. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16: 1289-97.
-
(2010)
Clin Cancer Res.
, vol.16
, pp. 1289-1297
-
-
Jain, R.K.1
Lee, J.J.2
Hong, D.3
Markman, M.4
Gong, J.5
Naing, A.6
-
12
-
-
66849118694
-
Dose escalation methods in phase 1 cancer clinical trials
-
Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, Siu LL. Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:708-20.
-
(2009)
J Natl Cancer Inst.
, vol.101
, pp. 708-720
-
-
Le Tourneau, C.1
Lee, J.J.2
Siu, L.L.3
-
13
-
-
3242679103
-
Phase 1 trial design for solid tumor studies of targeted, non-cytotoxic agents: Theory and practice
-
Parulekar WR, Eisenhauer EA. Phase 1 trial design for solid tumor studies of targeted, non-cytotoxic agents: Theory and practice. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:990-7.
-
(2004)
J Natl Cancer Inst.
, vol.96
, pp. 990-997
-
-
Parulekar, W.R.1
Eisenhauer, E.A.2
-
14
-
-
84865165918
-
The price we pay for progress: A meta-analysis of harms of newly approved anticancer drugs
-
Niraula S, Seruga B, Ocana A, Shao T, Goldstein R, Tannock IF, et al. The price we pay for progress: A meta-analysis of harms of newly approved anticancer drugs. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3012-9.
-
(2012)
J Clin Oncol.
, vol.30
, pp. 3012-3019
-
-
Niraula, S.1
Seruga, B.2
Ocana, A.3
Shao, T.4
Goldstein, R.5
Tannock, I.F.6
-
15
-
-
14544284502
-
Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials 1991 through 2002
-
Horstmann E, McCabe MS, Grochow L, Yamamoto S, Rubinstein L, Budd T, et al. Risks and benefits of phase 1 oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:895-904.
-
(2005)
N Engl J Med.
, vol.352
, pp. 895-904
-
-
Horstmann, E.1
McCabe, M.S.2
Grochow, L.3
Yamamoto, S.4
Rubinstein, L.5
Budd, T.6
-
16
-
-
7244243743
-
Trends in the risks and benefits to patients with cancer participating in phase 1 clinical trials
-
Roberts TG Jr, Goulart BH, Squitieri L, Stallings SC, Halpern EF, Chabner BA, et al. Trends in the risks and benefits to patients with cancer participating in phase 1 clinical trials. JAMA. 2004;292: 2130-40.
-
(2004)
JAMA
, vol.292
, pp. 2130-2140
-
-
Roberts, Jr.T.G.1
Goulart, B.H.2
Squitieri, L.3
Stallings, S.C.4
Halpern, E.F.5
Chabner, B.A.6
-
17
-
-
84857055503
-
Patient selection for oncology phase I trials: A multiinstitutional study of prognostic factors
-
Olmos D, A'Hern R P, Marsoni S, Morales R, Gomez-Roca C, Verweij J, et al. Patient selection for oncology phase I trials: A multiinstitutional study of prognostic factors. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30: 996-1004.
-
(2012)
J Clin Oncol.
, vol.30
, pp. 996-1004
-
-
Olmos, D.1
A'Hern, R.P.2
Marsoni, S.3
Morales, R.4
Gomez-Roca, C.5
Verweij, J.6
-
18
-
-
84856071989
-
A qualitative study evaluating causality attribution for serious adverse events during early-phase oncology clinical trials
-
Mukherjee SD, Coombes ME, Levine M, Cosby J, Kowaleski B, Arnold A. A qualitative study evaluating causality attribution for serious adverse events during early-phase oncology clinical trials. Invest New Drugs. 2011;29:1013-20.
-
(2011)
Invest New Drugs.
, vol.29
, pp. 1013-1020
-
-
Mukherjee, S.D.1
Coombes, M.E.2
Levine, M.3
Cosby, J.4
Kowaleski, B.5
Arnold, A.6
-
19
-
-
77950505295
-
Choice of starting dose for molecularly targeted agents evaluated in first-in-human phase I cancer clinical trials
-
Le Tourneau C, Stathis A, Vidal L, Moore MJ, Siu LL. Choice of starting dose for molecularly targeted agents evaluated in first-in-human phase I cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1401-7.
-
(2010)
J Clin Oncol.
, vol.28
, pp. 1401-1407
-
-
Le Tourneau, C.1
Stathis, A.2
Vidal, L.3
Moore, M.J.4
Siu, L.L.5
-
20
-
-
0036843156
-
The multifunctional multiinstitutional and sometimes even global phase 1 study: A better life for phase 1 evaluations or just "living large"?
-
Tolcher AW, Takimoto CH, Rowinsky EK. The multifunctional, multiinstitutional, and sometimes even global phase I study: A better life for phase I evaluations or just "living large"? J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20:4276-8.
-
(2002)
J Clin Oncol.
, vol.20
, pp. 4276-4278
-
-
Tolcher, A.W.1
Takimoto, C.H.2
Rowinsky, E.K.3
-
21
-
-
37149030424
-
Endpoints and other considerations in phase 1 studies of targeted anticancer therapy: Recommendations from the task force on Methodology for the Development of Innovative Cancer Therapies (MDICT)
-
Booth CM, Calvert AH, Giaccone G, Lobbezoo MW, Seymour LK, Eisenhauer EA. Endpoints and other considerations in phase I studies of targeted anticancer therapy: recommendations from the task force on Methodology for the Development of Innovative Cancer Therapies (MDICT). Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:19-24.
-
(2008)
Eur J Cancer.
, vol.44
, pp. 19-24
-
-
Booth, C.M.1
Calvert, A.H.2
Giaccone, G.3
Lobbezoo, M.W.4
Seymour, L.K.5
Eisenhauer, E.A.6
|