Suppr超能文献

抗肿瘤药物I期研究起始剂量的选择与剂量递增

Choice of starting dose and escalation for phase I studies of antitumor agents.

作者信息

Penta J S, Rosner G L, Trump D L

机构信息

Cancer Therapy Department, Burroughs Wellcome Co., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.

出版信息

Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 1992;31(3):247-50. doi: 10.1007/BF00685555.

Abstract

The standard approaches to initial dose selection and dose escalation in phase I trials may be inappropriately conservative. These approaches mandate accrual of large numbers of patients, most of whom are treated at low and potentially ineffective doses. We compared the clinically determined maximum tolerable dose (MTD) with the starting dose of 45 drugs that had undergone phase I studies during the period 1977-1989. We also examined the number of dose-escalation steps required to achieve the MTD in relation to nonhematologic and hematologic dose-limiting toxicity. The median ratio of MTD to starting dose for all drugs was 20 (range, < 1-433) and the median number of dose levels studied to reach the MTD was 8 (range, 0-23). For drugs with nonhematologic dose-limiting toxicity, the median ratio of MTD to starting dose was 30 (range, 3-385) as compared with 12.8 (range, < 1-433) for those with hematologic dose-limiting toxicity (P = 0.023). The median number of dose-escalation steps required to reach the MTD was 9 (range, 2-18) for drugs with nonhematologic dose-limiting toxicity as compared with 5.5 (range, 0-23) for those with hematologic dose-limiting toxicity (P = 0.038). We also examined the response rate for 1,110 patients treated with 21 phase-I-study drugs for which response information was available. Responses were reported for 29 patients (2.6%). Among the 476 patients treated at the 3 highest dose steps, 17 responded (3.6%), which is double the response rate obtained at the lower doses (P = 0.08). It is suggested that although the usual methods for choosing starting doses and dose-escalation schemes for phase I studies are safe, they are overly conservative and delay opportunities for therapeutic benefit in phase I and subsequent phase II trials.

摘要

I期试验中初始剂量选择和剂量递增的标准方法可能过于保守。这些方法要求纳入大量患者,其中大多数患者接受的是低剂量且可能无效的治疗。我们比较了1977年至1989年期间进行I期研究的45种药物的临床确定的最大耐受剂量(MTD)和起始剂量。我们还研究了达到MTD所需的剂量递增步骤数量与非血液学和血液学剂量限制毒性的关系。所有药物的MTD与起始剂量的中位数比值为20(范围,<1 - 433),达到MTD所研究的剂量水平中位数为8(范围,0 - 23)。对于有非血液学剂量限制毒性的药物,MTD与起始剂量的中位数比值为30(范围,3 - 385),而有血液学剂量限制毒性的药物该比值为12.8(范围,<1 - 433)(P = 0.023)。有非血液学剂量限制毒性的药物达到MTD所需的剂量递增步骤中位数为9(范围,2 - 18),而有血液学剂量限制毒性的药物为5.5(范围,0 - 23)(P = 0.038)。我们还研究了1110名接受21种有反应信息的I期研究药物治疗患者的反应率。报告有反应的患者为29例(2.6%)。在接受最高3个剂量步骤治疗的476例患者中,17例有反应(3.6%),这是较低剂量时反应率的两倍(P = 0.08)。有人认为,尽管I期研究中选择起始剂量和剂量递增方案的常用方法是安全的,但它们过于保守,延误了I期及后续II期试验中获得治疗益处的机会。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验