© 2004 by Oxford University Press
© 2004 Oxford University Press
ARTICLE |
Phase I Trial Design for Solid Tumor Studies of Targeted, Non-Cytotoxic Agents: Theory and Practice
Affiliation of authors: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Correspondence to: Wendy Parulekar, MD, FRCPC, National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group, 10 Stuart St., Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 3N6 (e-mail: wparulekar{at}ctg.queensu.ca)
Background: New targeted, non-cytotoxic anticancer agents, such as small-molecule kinase inhibitors, pose challenges to the current phase I paradigm of dose selection based on toxicity. Moreover, increasing the drug dose to toxicity may be unnecessary for drug effect, making the use of maximum tolerated dose as a surrogate of effective dose inappropriate in the phase I setting. Because little is known about the optimal methods of recommended phase II dose selection of targeted, non-cytotoxic therapies, we reviewed the strategies that were used in completed phase I studies of these drugs. Methods: We retrieved 60 publications of phase I studies involving 31 single agents representative of the most common targets of interest in the oncology literature. For each publication, we abstracted data regarding patient population, starting dose, methods of dose escalation and determination of recommended phase II dose, and inclusion of correlative studies in study conduct. Results: Of the 60 completed phase I studies, 36 used toxicity and eight used pharmacokinetic data as endpoints for selection of the recommended phase II dose. Nontraditional endpoints, such as measures of molecular drug effects in tumor or surrogate tissue or functional imaging studies, were not routinely incorporated into the study design and rarely formed the primary basis for dose selection. Conclusions: To date, phase I studies of targeted anticancer agents have generally used traditional endpoints for selection of the recommended phase II dose. More research is needed to define suitable molecular measures of drug effect and the means to incorporate them in the early drug development process.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
Editorial about this Article
- Nontoxicity Endpoints in Phase I Trial Designs for Targeted, Non-Cytotoxic Agents
- Edward L. Korn
J Natl Cancer Inst 2004 96: 977-978.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. Le Tourneau, J. J. Lee, and L. L. Siu Dose Escalation Methods in Phase I Cancer Clinical Trials J Natl Cancer Inst, May 20, 2009; 101(10): 708 - 720. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. B. Contractor and E. O. Aboagye Monitoring Predominantly Cytostatic Treatment Response with 18F-FDG PET J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2009; 50(Suppl_1): 97S - 105S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. M. Chang, K. R. Lamborn, J. G. Kuhn, W.K. A. Yung, M. R. Gilbert, P. Y. Wen, H. A. Fine, M. P. Mehta, L. M. DeAngelis, F. S. Lieberman, et al. Neurooncology clinical trial design for targeted therapies: Lessons learned from the North American Brain Tumor Consortium Neuro-oncol, August 1, 2008; 10(4): 631 - 642. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. H. Doroshow and R. E. Parchment Oncologic Phase 0 Trials Incorporating Clinical Pharmacodynamics: from Concept to Patient Clin. Cancer Res., June 15, 2008; 14(12): 3658 - 3663. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Labianca, M. Garassino, and V. Torri Predicting response of molecular targeted therapies: a still possible challenge? Ann. Onc., May 1, 2008; 19(5): 829 - 830. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Goulart, T. G. Roberts, J. Clark, and B. A. Chabner Reply to the Letter to the Editor from Banerji et al Clin. Cancer Res., April 15, 2008; 14(8): 2513 - 2513. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. R. Pond, L. L. Siu, M. Moore, A. Oza, H. W. Hirte, E. Winquist, G. Goss, G. Hudes, and C. A. Townsley Nomograms to Predict Serious Adverse Events in Phase II Clinical Trials of Molecularly Targeted Agents J. Clin. Oncol., March 10, 2008; 26(8): 1324 - 1330. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. H. El-Maraghi and E. A. Eisenhauer Review of Phase II Trial Designs Used in Studies of Molecular Targeted Agents: Outcomes and Predictors of Success in Phase III J. Clin. Oncol., March 10, 2008; 26(8): 1346 - 1354. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. R. Tseng, K. W. Kang, M. Dandekar, S. Yaghoubi, J. H. Lee, J. G. Christensen, S. Muir, P. W. Vincent, N. R. Michaud, and S. S. Gambhir Preclinical Efficacy of the c-Met Inhibitor CE-355621 in a U87 MG Mouse Xenograft Model Evaluated by 18F-FDG Small-Animal PET J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2008; 49(1): 129 - 134. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
O. Rixe and T. Fojo Is Cell Death a Critical End Point for Anticancer Therapies or Is Cytostasis Sufficient? Clin. Cancer Res., December 15, 2007; 13(24): 7280 - 7287. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Ratain and R. H. Glassman Biomarkers in Phase I Oncology Trials: Signal, Noise, or Expensive Distraction? Clin. Cancer Res., November 15, 2007; 13(22): 6545 - 6548. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. H.L. Goulart, J. W. Clark, H. H. Pien, T. G. Roberts, S. N. Finkelstein, and B. A. Chabner Trends in the Use and Role of Biomarkers in Phase I Oncology Trials Clin. Cancer Res., November 15, 2007; 13(22): 6719 - 6726. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Burges, P. Wimberger, C. Kumper, V. Gorbounova, H. Sommer, B. Schmalfeldt, J. Pfisterer, M. Lichinitser, A. Makhson, V. Moiseyenko, et al. Effective Relief of Malignant Ascites in Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer by a Trifunctional Anti-EpCAM x Anti-CD3 Antibody: A Phase I/II Study Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2007; 13(13): 3899 - 3905. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. A. Fecher, S. D. Cummings, M. J. Keefe, and R. M. Alani Toward a Molecular Classification of Melanoma J. Clin. Oncol., April 20, 2007; 25(12): 1606 - 1620. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Chabner Phase II Cancer Trials: Out of Control? Clin. Cancer Res., April 15, 2007; 13(8): 2307 - 2308. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Maloney, P. A. Clarke, S. Naaby-Hansen, R. Stein, J.-O. Koopman, A. Akpan, A. Yang, M. Zvelebil, R. Cramer, L. Stimson, et al. Gene and Protein Expression Profiling of Human Ovarian Cancer Cells Treated with the Heat Shock Protein 90 Inhibitor 17-Allylamino-17-Demethoxygeldanamycin Cancer Res., April 1, 2007; 67(7): 3239 - 3253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. A. Mullamitha, N. C. Ton, G. J.M. Parker, A. Jackson, P. J. Julyan, C. Roberts, G. A. Buonaccorsi, Y. Watson, K. Davies, S. Cheung, et al. Phase I Evaluation of a Fully Human Anti-{alpha}v Integrin Monoclonal Antibody (CNTO 95) in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors Clin. Cancer Res., April 1, 2007; 13(7): 2128 - 2135. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Agulnik, A. M. Oza, G. R. Pond, and L. L. Siu Impact and Perceptions of Mandatory Tumor Biopsies for Correlative Studies in Clinical Trials of Novel Anticancer Agents J. Clin. Oncol., October 20, 2006; 24(30): 4801 - 4807. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. A. Adjei What Is the Right Dose? The Elusive Optimal Biologic Dose in Phase I Clinical Trials J. Clin. Oncol., September 1, 2006; 24(25): 4054 - 4055. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Leyton, J. P. Alao, M. Da Costa, A. V. Stavropoulou, J. R. Latigo, M. Perumal, R. Pillai, Q. He, P. Atadja, E. W.-F. Lam, et al. In vivo Biological Activity of the Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor LAQ824 Is detectable with 3'-Deoxy-3'-[18F]Fluorothymidine Positron Emission Tomography. Cancer Res., August 1, 2006; 66(15): 7621 - 7629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Workman, E. O. Aboagye, Y.-L. Chung, J. R. Griffiths, R. Hart, M. O. Leach, R. J. Maxwell, P. M. J. McSheehy, P. M. Price, and J. Zweit Minimally invasive pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic technologies in hypothesis-testing clinical trials of innovative therapies. J Natl Cancer Inst, May 3, 2006; 98(9): 580 - 598. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Sankaranarayanapillai, W. P. Tong, D. S. Maxwell, A. Pal, J. Pang, W. G. Bornmann, J. G. Gelovani, and S. M. Ronen Detection of histone deacetylase inhibition by noninvasive magnetic resonance spectroscopy Mol. Cancer Ther., May 1, 2006; 5(5): 1325 - 1334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. M.S. Al-Saffar, H. Troy, A. R. de Molina, L. E. Jackson, B. Madhu, J. R. Griffiths, M. O. Leach, P. Workman, J. C. Lacal, I. R. Judson, et al. Noninvasive Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Pharmacodynamic Markers of the Choline Kinase Inhibitor MN58b in Human Carcinoma Models Cancer Res., January 1, 2006; 66(1): 427 - 434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. Banerji, M. Walton, F. Raynaud, R. Grimshaw, L. Kelland, M. Valenti, I. Judson, and P. Workman Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Relationships for the Heat Shock Protein 90 Molecular Chaperone Inhibitor 17-Allylamino, 17-Demethoxygeldanamycin in Human Ovarian Cancer Xenograft Models Clin. Cancer Res., October 1, 2005; 11(19): 7023 - 7032. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. J. Epstein Maintenance Therapy to Suppress Micrometastasis: The New Challenge for Adjuvant Cancer Treatment Clin. Cancer Res., August 1, 2005; 11(15): 5337 - 5341. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Beloueche-Babari, L. E. Jackson, N. M.S. Al-Saffar, P. Workman, M. O. Leach, and S. M. Ronen Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Monitoring of Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Signaling Inhibition Cancer Res., April 15, 2005; 65(8): 3356 - 3363. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. G. Eckhardt Features of a High Quality Phase I Trial Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Educ. Book, April 1, 2005; 2005(1): 95 - 97. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Yingling and S. Glatt Impact of PK/PD Evaluation of Targeted Therapies on Early Drug Discovery and Clinical Development Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Educ. Book, April 1, 2005; 2005(1): 227 - 230. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. A. Slapak and T. M. Daly Application of Biomarkers to Oncology Drug Development Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Educ. Book, April 1, 2005; 2005(1): 291 - 293. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. A. Messmann Patient Selection for Early Phase Clinical Trials Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Educ. Book, April 1, 2005; 2005(1): 294 - 296. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. A. Sausville Indifferently Pursued or Unowned Drugs: Who Should Lead Where Companies Do Not Tread? J. Clin. Oncol., March 20, 2005; 23(9): 1796 - 1798. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. X. Chen and I. F. Tannock Risks and Benefits of Phase 1 Clinical Trials Evaluating New Anticancer Agents: A Case for More Innovation JAMA, November 3, 2004; 292(17): 2150 - 2151. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. L. Korn Nontoxicity Endpoints in Phase I Trial Designs for Targeted, Non-Cytotoxic Agents J Natl Cancer Inst, July 7, 2004; 96(13): 977 - 978. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|