Suppr超能文献

分子靶向药物和免疫疗法试验的剂量探索设计。

Dose-finding designs for trials of molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapies.

作者信息

Chiuzan Cody, Shtaynberger Jonathan, Manji Gulam A, Duong Jimmy K, Schwartz Gary K, Ivanova Anastasia, Lee Shing M

机构信息

a Department of Biostatistics, Mailman School of Public Health , Columbia University , New York , New York , USA.

b Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine , Columbia University , New York , New York , USA.

出版信息

J Biopharm Stat. 2017;27(3):477-494. doi: 10.1080/10543406.2017.1289952. Epub 2017 Feb 6.

Abstract

Recently, there has been a surge of early phase trials of molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) and immunotherapies. These new therapies have different toxicity profiles compared to cytotoxic therapies. MTAs can benefit from new trial designs that allow inclusion of low-grade toxicities, late-onset toxicities, addition of an efficacy endpoint, and flexibility in the specification of a target toxicity probability. To study the degree of adoption of these methods, we conducted a Web of Science search of articles published between 2008 and 2014 that describe phase 1 oncology trials. Trials were categorized based on the dose-finding design used and the type of drug studied. Out of 1,712 dose-finding trials that met our criteria, 1,591 (92.9%) utilized a rule-based design, and 92 (5.4%; range 2.3% in 2009 to 9.7% in 2014) utilized a model-based or novel design. Over half of the trials tested an MTA or immunotherapy. Among the MTA and immunotherapy trials, 5.8% used model-based methods, compared to 3.9% and 8.3% of the chemotherapy or radiotherapy trials, respectively. While the percentage of trials using novel dose-finding designs has tripled since 2007, the adoption of these designs continues to remain low.

摘要

最近,分子靶向药物(MTAs)和免疫疗法的早期试验激增。与细胞毒性疗法相比,这些新疗法具有不同的毒性特征。MTAs可受益于新的试验设计,这些设计允许纳入低级别毒性、迟发性毒性、增加疗效终点以及在指定目标毒性概率方面具有灵活性。为了研究这些方法的采用程度,我们在科学网(Web of Science)上搜索了2008年至2014年间发表的描述1期肿瘤学试验的文章。试验根据所使用的剂量探索设计和所研究药物的类型进行分类。在符合我们标准的1712项剂量探索试验中,1591项(92.9%)采用了基于规则的设计,92项(5.4%;范围从2009年的2.3%到2014年的9.7%)采用了基于模型或新颖的设计。超过一半的试验测试了MTA或免疫疗法。在MTA和免疫疗法试验中,5.8%使用了基于模型的方法,而化疗或放疗试验分别为3.9%和8.3%。虽然自2007年以来使用新颖剂量探索设计的试验百分比增加了两倍,但这些设计的采用率仍然很低。

相似文献

1
Dose-finding designs for trials of molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapies.
J Biopharm Stat. 2017;27(3):477-494. doi: 10.1080/10543406.2017.1289952. Epub 2017 Feb 6.
2
Repeated measures dose-finding design with time-trend detection in the presence of correlated toxicity data.
Clin Trials. 2017 Dec;14(6):611-620. doi: 10.1177/1740774517723829. Epub 2017 Aug 2.
4
Bayesian dose-finding designs for combination of molecularly targeted agents assuming partial stochastic ordering.
Stat Med. 2015 Feb 28;34(5):859-75. doi: 10.1002/sim.6376. Epub 2014 Nov 21.
6
A novel framework of Bayesian optimal interval design for phase I trials with late-onset toxicities.
Contemp Clin Trials. 2021 Jun;105:106404. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106404. Epub 2021 Apr 18.
9
Case Example of Dose Optimization Using Data From Bortezomib Dose-Finding Clinical Trials.
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 20;34(12):1395-401. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.66.0662. Epub 2016 Feb 29.
10
An adaptive dose-finding method using a change-point model for molecularly targeted agents in phase I trials.
Stat Med. 2016 Oct 15;35(23):4093-109. doi: 10.1002/sim.6981. Epub 2016 May 11.

引用本文的文献

1
Phase I clinical trial designs in oncology: A systematic literature review from 2020 to 2022.
J Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Sep 24;8(1):e134. doi: 10.1017/cts.2024.599. eCollection 2024.
3
Determining drug dose in the era of targeted therapies: playing it (un)safe?
Blood Cancer J. 2022 Aug 23;12(8):123. doi: 10.1038/s41408-022-00720-7.
4
Operating characteristics are needed to properly evaluate the scientific validity of phase I protocols.
Contemp Clin Trials. 2021 Sep;108:106517. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2021.106517. Epub 2021 Jul 25.
7
Seamless phase I/II design for novel anticancer agents with competing disease progression.
Stat Med. 2021 Sep 20;40(21):4568-4581. doi: 10.1002/sim.9080. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
8
Designing Dose-Finding Phase I Clinical Trials: Top 10 Questions That Should Be Discussed With Your Statistician.
JCO Precis Oncol. 2021 Feb 1;5:317-324. doi: 10.1200/PO.20.00379. eCollection 2021 Jan.
9
Designing and evaluating dose-escalation studies made easy: The MoDEsT web app.
Clin Trials. 2020 Apr;17(2):147-156. doi: 10.1177/1740774519890146. Epub 2019 Dec 19.
10
Incorporating patient-reported outcomes in dose-finding clinical trials.
Stat Med. 2020 Feb 10;39(3):310-325. doi: 10.1002/sim.8402. Epub 2019 Dec 3.

本文引用的文献

1
The rapid enrollment design for Phase I clinical trials.
Stat Med. 2016 Jul 10;35(15):2516-24. doi: 10.1002/sim.6886. Epub 2016 Feb 1.
2
Designs of drug-combination phase I trials in oncology: a systematic review of the literature.
Ann Oncol. 2015 Apr;26(4):669-674. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu516. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
3
Dose-response relationship in phase i clinical trials: a European Drug Development Network (EDDN) Collaboration Study.
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Nov 15;20(22):5663-71. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0719. Epub 2014 Sep 24.
5
Optimizing dosing of oncology drugs.
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014 Nov;96(5):572-9. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2014.153. Epub 2014 Aug 8.
6
Adaptive dose-finding studies: a review of model-guided phase I clinical trials.
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Aug 10;32(23):2505-11. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.6051. Epub 2014 Jun 30.
7
Phase I/II adaptive design for drug combination oncology trials.
Stat Med. 2014 May 30;33(12):1990-2003. doi: 10.1002/sim.6097. Epub 2014 Jan 28.
8
Dose-finding trial designs for combination therapies in oncology.
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Jan 10;32(2):65-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.9198. Epub 2013 Dec 9.
10
Adherence to imatinib therapy in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors.
Cancer Treat Rev. 2014 Mar;40(2):242-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2013.07.005. Epub 2013 Aug 7.

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