Erratum: American society of clinical oncology policy statement update: The critical role of phase i trials in cancer research and treatment (Journal of Clinical Oncology (2019) 33 (278-284) DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2014.58.2635);American society of clinical oncology policy statement update: The critical role of phase I trials in cancer research and treatment

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 278-284

  Weber, Jeffrey S ^a   Levit, Laura A ^b   Adamson, Peter C ^c   Bruinooge, Suanna ^b   Burris, Howard A ^f   Carducci, Michael A ^g   Dicker, Adam P ^d   Gönen, Mithat ^h   Keefe, Stephen M ^e   Postow, Michael A ^h   Thompson, Michael A ⁱ   Waterhouse, David M ^j   Weiner, Susan L ^k   Schuchter, Lynn M ^e  

^a H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY   (United States)

^c CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA   (United States)

^d THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^f SARAH CANNON RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^g JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^h MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

ⁱ AURORA HEALTH CARE   (United States)

^j Oncology Hematology Care   (United States)

^k Children's Cause for Cancer Advocacy   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER RESEARCH; CANCER THERAPY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PEDIATRICS; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK ASSESSMENT; CONCEPT FORMATION; ECONOMICS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; INSURANCE; MEDICAID; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICARE; NEOPLASMS; ONCOLOGY; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS; TRENDS; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; CONCEPT FORMATION; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; INSURANCE COVERAGE; MEDICAID; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; MEDICARE; NEOPLASMS; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84921762860     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.18.02274     Document Type: Erratum

References (100)

1. Critical role of phase I clinical trials in cancer treatment: American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol 15:853-859, 1997
2. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Pub Law 111-148, 111th Congress, March 23, 2010
3. Smith BD, Smith GL, Hurria A, et al: Future of cancer incidence in the United States: Burdens upon an aging, changing nation. J Clin Oncol 27: 2758-2765, 2009
4. de Moor JS, Mariotto AB, Parry C, et al: Cancer survivors in the United States: Prevalence across the survivorship trajectory and implications for care. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 22:561-570, 2013
5. Verweij J, Disis ML, Cannistra SA: Phase I studies of drug combinations. J Clin Oncol 28:4545-4546, 2010
6. O'Quigley J: Retrospective analysis of sequential dose-finding designs. Biometrics 61:749-756, 2005
7. Yin G, Yuan Y: Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method in phase I clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc 104:954-968, 2009
8. Garrett-Mayer E: The continual reassessment method for dose-finding studies: A tutorial. Clin Trials 3:57-71, 2006
9. Cheung YK: Coherence principles in dose-finding studies. Biometrika 92:863-873, 2005
10. Babb J, Rogatko A, Zacks S: Cancer phase I clinical trials: Efficient dose escalation with overdose control. Stat Med 17:1103-1120, 1998
11. Goodman SN, Zahurak ML, Piantadosi S: Some practical improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies. Stat Med 14:1149-1161, 1995
12. O'Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L: Continual reassessment method: A practical design for phase 1 clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics 46:33-48, 1990
13. Iasonos A, Wilton AS, Riedel ER, et al: A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in phase I dose-finding studies. Clin Trials 5:465-477, 2008
14. Ratain MJ: Targeted therapies: Redefining the primary objective of phase I oncology trials. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 11:503-504, 2014
15. US Food and Drug Administration: Trametinib and dabrafenib. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/InformationOnDrugs/ApprovedDrugs/ucm381451.htm
16. Flaherty KT, Infante JR, Daud A, et al: Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. N Engl J Med 367:1694-1703, 2012
17. Simon R, Freidlin B, Rubinstein L, et al: Accelerated titration designs for phase I clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 89:1138-1147, 1997
18. Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, Siu LL: Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:708-720, 2009
19. National Cancer Institute: A Handbook for Clinical Investigators Conducting Therapeutic Clinical Trials. http://ctep.cancer.gov/investigatorResources/investigators-handbook.htm
20. Kodish E, Stocking C, Ratain MJ, et al: Ethical issues in phase I oncology research: A comparison of investigators and institutional review board chairpersons. J Clin Oncol 10:1810-1816, 1992
21. Daugherty C, Ratain MJ, Grochowski E, et al: Perceptions of cancer patients and their physicians involved in phase I trials. J Clin Oncol 13:1062-1072, 1995
22. Nurgat ZA, Craig W, Campbell NC, et al: Patient motivations surrounding participation in phase I and phase II clinical trials of cancer chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 92:1001-1005, 2005
23. US Food and Drug Administration: Investigational new drug application, 21 CFR 312.21, 2013. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=312.21
24. Melink TJ, Clark GM, Von Hoff DD: The impact of phase I clinical trials on the quality of life of patients with cancer. Anticancer Drugs 3:571-576, 1992
25. Berdel WE, Knopf H, Fromm M, et al: Influence of phase I early clinical trials on the quality of life of cancer patients: A pilot study. Anticancer Res 8:313-321, 1988
26. Cohen L, de Moor C, Parker PA, et al: Quality of life in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma participating in a phase I trial of an autologous tumor-derived vaccine. Urol Oncol 7:119-124, 2002
27. Francis RJ, Sharma SK, Springer C, et al: A phase I trial of antibody directed enzyme prodrug therapy (ADEPT) in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma or other CEA producing tumours. Br J Cancer 87:600-607, 2002
28. Cohen MZ, Slomka J, Pentz RD, et al: Phase I participants' views of quality of life and trial participation burdens. Support Care Cancer 15:885-890, 2007
29. Agrawal M, Emanuel E: Ethics of phase I oncology studies: Reexamining the arguments and data. JAMA 290:1075-1082, 2003
30. Moore S: A need to try everything: Patient participation in phase I trials. J Adv Nurs 33:738-747, 2001
31. Dresser R: First-in-human trial participants: Not a vulnerable population, but vulnerable nonetheless. J Law Med Ethics 37:38-50, 2009
32. Chen EX, Tannock IF: Risks and benefits of phase I clinical trials evaluating new anticancer agents: A case for more innovation. JAMA 292: 2150-2051, 2004
33. Agrawal M, Danis M: End-of-life care for terminally ill participants in clinical research. J Palliat Med 5:729-737, 2002
34. Carlson LE, Bultz BD, Morris DG: Individualized quality of life, standardized quality of life, and distress in patients undergoing a phase I trial of the novel therapeutic Reolysin (reovirus). Health Qual Life Outcomes 3:7, 2005
35. Rouanne M, Massard C, Hollebecque A, et al: Evaluation of sexuality, health-related quality-of-life and depression in advanced cancer patients: A prospective study in a Phase I clinical trial unit of predominantly targeted anticancer drugs. Eur J Cancer 49:431-438, 2013
36. Cox K: Enhancing cancer clinical trial management: Recommendations from a qualitative study of trial participants' experiences. Psychooncology 9:314-322, 2000
37. Miller FG, Joffe S: Benefit in phase I oncology trials: Therapeutic misconception or reasonable treatment option? Clin Trials 5:617-623, 2008
38. Druker BJ, Talpaz M, Resta DJ, et al: Efficacy and safety of a specific inhibitor of the BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase in chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 344:1031-1037, 2001
39. Druker BJ: Inhibition of the Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase as a therapeutic strategy for CML. Oncogene 21:8541-8546, 2002
40. Hamid O, Robert C, Daud A, et al: Safety and tumor responses with lambrolizumab (anti-PD-1) in melanoma. N Engl J Med 369:134-144, 2013
41. Camidge DR, Bang YJ, Kwak EL, et al: Activity and safety of crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: Updated results from a phase I study. Lancet Oncol 13:1011-1019, 2012
42. Estey E, Hoth D, Simon R, et al: Therapeutic response in phase I trials of antineoplastic agents. Cancer Treat Rep 70:1105-1015, 1986
43. Decoster G, Stein G, Holdener EE: Responses and toxic deaths in phase I clinical trials. Ann Oncol 1:175-181, 1990
44. 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 34:451-454, 1994
45. Von Hoff DD, Turner J: Response rates, duration of response, and dose response effects in phase I studies of antineoplastics. Invest New Drugs 9:115-122, 1991
46. 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 14:287-295, 1996
47. Italiano A, Massard C, Bahleda R, et al: Treatment outcome and survival in participants of phase I oncology trials carried out from 2003 to 2006 at Institut Gustave Roussy. Ann Oncol 19:787-792, 2008
48. Korn EL, Arbuck SG, Pluda JM, et al: Clinical trial designs for cytostatic agents: Are new approaches needed? J Clin Oncol 19:265-272, 2001
49. Smith TJ, Temin S, Alesi ER, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: The integration of palliative care into standard oncology care. J Clin Oncol 30:880-887, 2012
50. Horstmann E, McCabe MS, Grochow L, et al: Risks and benefits of phase I oncology trials, 1991 through 2002. N Engl J Med 352:895-904, 2005
51. Creemers GJ, Bolis G, Gore M, et al: Topotecan, an active drug in the second-line treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer: Results of a large European phase II study. J Clin Oncol 14:3056-3061, 1996
52. Saltz LB, Cox JV, Blanke C, et al: Irinotecan plus fluorouracil and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer: Irinotecan Study Group. N Engl J Med 343:905-914, 2000
53. Burris HA 3rd, 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
54. Hodi FS, O'Day SJ, McDermott DF, et al: Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363:711-723, 2010
55. Roberts TG Jr, Goulart BH, Squitieri L, et al: Trends in the risks and benefits to patients with cancer participating in phase I clinical trials. JAMA 292:2130-2140, 2004
56. Falconi A, Lopes G, Parker JL: Biomarkers and receptor targeted therapies reduce clinical trial risk in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 9:163-169, 2014
57. Markman M: Further evidence of clinical benefit associated with participation in phase I oncology trials. Br J Cancer 98:1021-1022, 2008
58. Tsimberidou AM, Iskander NG, Hong DS, et al: Personalized medicine in a phase I clinical trials program: The MD Anderson Cancer Center initiative. Clin Cancer Res 18:6373-6383, 2012
59. 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 16:1289-1297, 2010
60. Postel-Vinay S, Arkenau HT, Olmos D, et al: Clinical benefit in phase-I trials of novel molecularly targeted agents: Does dose matter? Br J Cancer 100:1373-1378, 2009
61. Le Tourneau C, Gan HK, Razak AR, et al: Efficiency of new dose escalation designs in dose-finding phase I trials of molecularly targeted agents. PLoS One 7:e51039, 2012
62. Ji Y, Wang SJ: Modified toxicity probability interval design: A safer and more reliable method than the 3 + 3 design for practical phase I trials. J Clin Oncol 31:1785-1791, 2013
63. Hollebecque A, Postel-Vinay S, Verweij J, et al: Modifying phase I methodology to facilitate enrolment of molecularly selected patients. Eur J Cancer 49:1515-1520, 2013
64. LoRusso PM, Boerner SA, Seymour L: An overview of the optimal planning, design, and conduct of phase I studies of new therapeutics. Clin Cancer Res 16:1710-1718, 2010
65. Frei E 3rd: Clinical trials of antitumor agents: Experimental design and timeline considerations. Cancer J Sci Am 3:127-136, 1997
66. Arbuck SG: Workshop on phase I study design: Ninth NCI/EORTC New Drug Development Symposium, Amsterdam, March 12, 1996. Ann Oncol 7:567-573, 1996
67. Hamberg P, Ratain MJ, Lesaffre E, et al: Dose-escalation models for combination phase I trials in oncology. Eur J Cancer 46:2870-2878, 2010
68. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: National Coverage Determination (NCD) for Routine Costs in Clinical Trials, Section 310.1, 2007. http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/ncd-details.aspx?NCDId=1&ncdver=2&bc=BAABAAAAAAAA&
69. American Society of Clinical Oncology: Insurance Coverage for Clinical Trial Participants. http://www.asco.org/insurance-coverage-clinical-trial-participants
70. American Cancer Society: Clinical Trials: State Laws About Insurance Coverage. www.cancer.org/acs/groups/cid/documents/webcontent/002552-pdf.pdf
71. Kircher SM, Benson AB 3rd, Farber M, et al: Effect of the Accountable Care Act of 2010 on clinical trial insurance coverage. J Clin Oncol 30:548- 553, 2012
72. Flamm AL, Pentz RD: Communicating about phase I trials: Objective disclosures are only a first step. Oncologist 17:466-468, 2012
73. Cheng JD, Hitt J, Koczwara B, et al: Impact of quality of life on patient expectations regarding phase I clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 18:421-428, 2000
74. Pentz RD, White M, Harvey RD, et al: Therapeutic misconception, misestimation, and optimism in participants enrolled in phase I trials. Cancer 118:4571-4578, 2012
75. Sulmasy DP, Astrow AB, He MK, et al: The culture of faith and hope: Patients' justifications for their high estimations of expected therapeutic benefit when enrolling in early phase oncology trials. Cancer 116:3702-3711, 2010
76. Jansen LA, Appelbaum PS, Klein WM, et al: Unrealistic optimism in early-phase oncology trials. IRB 33:1-8, 2011
77. Joffe S, Mack JW: Deliberation and the life cycle of informed consent. Hastings Cent Rep 44: 33-35, 2014
78. Cousino MK, Zyzanski SJ, Yamokoski AD, et al: Communicating and understanding the purpose of pediatric phase I cancer trials. J Clin Oncol 30:4367-4372, 2012
79. Kass N, Taylor H, Fogarty L, et al: Purpose and benefits of early phase cancer trials: What do oncologists say? What do patients hear? J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 3:57-68, 2008
80. Kass NE, Sugarman J, Medley AM, et al: An intervention to improve cancer patients' understanding of early-phase clinical trials. IRB 31:1-10, 2009
81. Fallowfield LJ, Solis-Trapala I, Jenkins VA: Evaluation of an educational program to improve communication with patients about early-phase trial participation. Oncologist 17:377-383, 2012
82. Flowers CR, Seidenfeld J, Bow EJ, et al: Antimicrobial prophylaxis and outpatient management of fever and neutropenia in adults treated for malignancy: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 31:794-810, 2013
83. Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Blair SL, et al: Breast cancer version 3.2014. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 12:542-590, 2014
84. Institute of Medicine: Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2013
85. National Cancer Institute: Protocol Templates and Guidelines. http://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/templates-applications.htm
86. Buyse M: Limitations of adaptive clinical trials. Am Soc Clin Oncol Ed Book 133-137, 2012
87. Iasonos A, O'Quigley J: Adaptive dosefinding studies: A review of model-guided phase I clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 32:2505-2511, 2014
88. National Vital Statistics Reports: Deaths: Leading Causes for 2010. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr62/nvsr62-06.pdf
89. Oeffinger KC, Mertens AC, Sklar CA, et al: Chronic health conditions in adult survivors of childhood cancer. N Engl J Med 355:1572-1582, 2006
90. Geenen MM, Cardous-Ubbink MC, Kremer LC, et al: Medical assessment of adverse health outcomes in long-term survivors of childhood cancer. JAMA 297:2705-2715, 2007
91. Wasilewski-Masker K, Mertens AC, Patterson B, et al: Severity of health conditions identified in a pediatric cancer survivor program. Pediatr Blood Cancer 54:976-982, 2010
92. Stevens MC, Mahler H, Parkes S: The health status of adult survivors of cancer in childhood. Eur J Cancer 34:694-698, 1998
93. Garrè ML, Gandus S, Cesana B, et al: Health status of long-term survivors after cancer in childhood: Results of an uni-institutional study in Italy. Am J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 16:143-152, 1994
94. Hudson MM, Ness KK, Gurney JG, et al: Clinical ascertainment of health outcomes among adults treated for childhood cancer. JAMA 309:2371-2381, 2013
95. National Cancer Institute: Late Effects of Treatment for Childhood Cancer (PDQ). http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/lateeffects/HealthProfessional
96. Devine S, Dagher RN, Weiss KD, et al: Good clinical practice and the conduct of clinical studies in pediatric oncology. Pediatr Clin North Am 55:187-209, xi-xii, 2008
97. Skolnik JM, Barrett JS, Jayaraman B, et al: Shortening the timeline of pediatric phase I trials: The rolling six design. J Clin Oncol 26:190-195, 2008
98. Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act. Pub Law 107-109, 107th Congress, January 4, 2002
99. Institute of Medicine: Safe and Effective Medicines for Children: Pediatric Studies Conducted Under BPCA and PREA. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2012
100. O'Leary M, Krailo M, Anderson JR, et al: Progress in childhood cancer: 50 years of research collaboration, a report from the Children's Oncology Group. Semin Oncol 35:484-493, 2008