scholarly journals Testing many treatments within a single protocol over 10 years at MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL: Multi-arm, multi-stage platform, umbrella and basket protocols

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 451-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahesh KB Parmar ◽  
Matthew R Sydes ◽  
Fay H Cafferty ◽  
Babak Choodari-Oskooei ◽  
Ruth E Langley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
New Methods ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Clinical Trials Unit ◽  
New Treatment ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Phase I And Ii

There is real need to change how we do some of our clinical trials, as currently the testing and development process is too slow, too costly and too failure-prone often we find that a new treatment is no better than the current standard. Much of the focus on the development and testing pathway has been in improving the design of phase I and II trials. In this article, we present examples of new methods for improving the design of phase III trials (and the necessary lead up to them) as they are the most time-consuming and expensive part of the pathway. Key to all these methods is the aim to test many treatments and/or pose many therapeutic questions within one protocol.

scholarly journals A Review of Phase III Clinical Trials of Prostate Cancer Chemoprevention

2007 ◽  
Vol 89 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
JF Thorpe ◽  
S Jain ◽  
TH Marczylo ◽  
AJ Gescher ◽  
WP Steward ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Prevention ◽  
Age Of Onset ◽  
Cancer Chemoprevention ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials ◽  
Prostate Cancer Prevention ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

INTRODUCTION Prostate cancer is an excellent target for chemoprevention strategies; given its late age of onset, any delay in carcinogenesis would lead to a reduction in its incidence. This article reviews all the completed and on-going phase III trials in prostate cancer chemoprevention. PATIENTS AND METHODS All phase III trials of prostate cancer chemoprevention were identified within a Medline search using the keywords ‘clinical trial, prostate cancer, chemoprevention’. RESULTS In 2003, the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) became the first phase III clinical trial of prostate cancer prevention. This landmark study was terminated early due to the 24.8% reduction of prostate cancer prevalence over a 7-year period in those men taking the 5α-reductase inhibitor, finasteride. This article reviews the PCPT and the interpretation of the excess high-grade prostate cancer (HGPC) cases in the finasteride group. The lack of relationship between cumulative dose and the HGPC cases, and the possible sampling error of biopsies due to gland volume reduction in the finasteride group refutes the suggestion that this is a genuine increase in HGPC cases. The other on-going phase III clinical trials of prostate cancer chemoprevention – the REDUCE study using dutasteride, and the SELECT study using vitamin E and selenium – are also reviewed. CONCLUSIONS At present, finasteride remains the only intervention shown in long-term prospective phase III clinical trials to reduce the incidence of prostate cancer. Until we have the results of trials using alternative agents including the on-going REDUCE and SELECT trials, the advice given to men interested in prostate cancer prevention must include discussion of the results of the PCPT. The increased rate of HGPC in the finasteride group continues to generate debate; however, finasteride may still be suitable for prostate cancer prevention, particularly in men with lower urinary tract symptoms.

scholarly journals NOVEL DRUGS IN FOLLICULAR LYMPHOMA

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 2016061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Rossi ◽  
Antonella Anastasia
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Cell Receptor ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Non Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Free Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
New Treatment ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
Key Steps

Follicular lymphoma(FL) is the most common indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma and constitutes 15% to 30% of lymphoma diagnoses. The natural history of the disease is characterized by recurrent relapses and progressively shorter remissions with a median survival of 10yrs. The impossibility of a chieving a definite cure, have prompted investigations into the possible role of more effective and less toxic strategies with innovative therapeutic agents.  Recently Casulo et al demonstrated that approximately 20% of patients with FL actually relapse within 2 years after achieving remission with R-CHOP and have a poor prognosis. It is conceivable that this particularly chemoresistant population would benefit from specifically targeting the biologic and genetic factors that likely contribute to their poor prognosis.Evolving strategies for difficult to treat FL patients have recently considered  immunomodulatory agents, new monoclonal antibodies as well as drugs targeting selective intracellular pathways. The importance of targeting the microenvironment together with the malignant FL cell has been particularly underscored. We review the most promising approaches, such as the combination of anti-CD20 antibodies with immunomodulatory drugs (Lenalidomide), with mAbs directed against other surface antigens such as CD22 and CD23 (epratuzumab, lumiliximab), with immunomodulatory antibodies such as PD-1, or with inhibitors of key steps in the B-cell receptor pathway signaling such as PI3K inibithors(idelalisib, duvelisib). Another highly attractive approach is the application of the bi-specific T-cell engaging (BiTE) antibody blinatumomab which targets both CD19 and CD3 antigens. Moreover, we highlight the potential of these therapies,  taking into account their toxicity. Of course we must wait for Phase III trials results to confirm the benefit of these new treatment strategies toward a new era of chemotherapy-free treatment for follicular lymphoma.

scholarly journals Mechanisms of drug resistance of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at different levels

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiali Du ◽  
Jichun Gu ◽  
Ji Li
Keyword(s):  
Drug Resistance ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Solid Tumours ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Exploitation And Exploration ◽  
Different Levels

Abstract Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and the mortality of patients with PDAC has not significantly decreased over the last few decades. Novel strategies exhibiting promising effects in preclinical or phase I/II clinical trials are often situated in an embarrassing condition owing to the disappointing results in phase III trials. The efficacy of the current therapeutic regimens is consistently compromised by the mechanisms of drug resistance at different levels, distinctly more intractable than several other solid tumours. In this review, the main mechanisms of drug resistance clinicians and investigators are dealing with during the exploitation and exploration of the anti-tumour effects of drugs in PDAC treatment are summarized. Corresponding measures to overcome these limitations are also discussed.

Trial design from a clinical perspective

ESC CardioMed ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 3067-3071
Author(s):  
John G. F. Cleland ◽  
Ian Ford
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Commercial Company ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
General Guidance

This chapter is written primarily from the perspective of investigators with limited resources designing clinical trials to assess the effects of interventions on patient well-being and outcomes with the hope that the results might influence clinical practice and guidelines. Other perspectives should be taken into account. The advice may be less applicable when resources are abundant (e.g. phase III trials sponsored by a large commercial company). Much research is funded by commercial companies hoping for a return on investment; they will design clinical trials to increase the chance of a statistically positive result. Many investigators will do the same although their motivation may differ. However, practising clinicians, patients, and health services want trials that help inform their daily clinical practice rather than merely achieving statistical significance. Large studies may be statistically positive but of dubious practical significance. This chapter gives some general guidance on selecting patients, comparators, endpoints, and study design.

scholarly journals A new era for stroke therapy: Integrating neurovascular protection with optimal reperfusion

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (12) ◽  
pp. 2073-2091 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ligen Shi ◽  
Marcelo Rocha ◽  
Rehana K Leak ◽  
Jingyan Zhao ◽  
Tarun N Bhatia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Animal Models ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Preclinical Studies ◽  
New Era ◽  
Stroke Research ◽  
Neuroprotective Strategies ◽  
Neurovascular Protection ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Recent advances in stroke reperfusion therapies have led to remarkable improvement in clinical outcomes, but many patients remain severely disabled, due in part to the lack of effective neuroprotective strategies. In this review, we show that 95% of published preclinical studies on “neuroprotectants” (1990–2018) reported positive outcomes in animal models of ischemic stroke, while none translated to successful Phase III trials. There are many complex reasons for this failure in translational research, including that the majority of clinical trials did not test early delivery of neuroprotectants in combination with successful reperfusion. In contrast to the clinical trials, >80% of recent preclinical studies examined the neuroprotectant in animal models of transient ischemia with complete reperfusion. Furthermore, only a small fraction of preclinical studies included long-term functional assessments, aged animals of both genders, and models with stroke comorbidities. Recent clinical trials demonstrate that 70%–80% of patients treated with endovascular thrombectomy achieve successful reperfusion. These successes revive the opportunity to retest previously failed approaches, including cocktail drugs that target multiple injury phases and different cell types. It is our hope that neurovascular protectants can be retested in future stroke research studies with specific criteria outlined in this review to increase translational successes.

scholarly journals Systemic adjuvant therapies in renal cell carcinoma

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastiano Buti ◽  
Melissa Bersanelli ◽  
Maddalena Donini ◽  
Andrea Ardizzoni
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Radical Surgery ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Adjuvant Therapies ◽  
Systemic Treatments

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the ten most frequent solid tumors worldwide. Recent innovations in the treatment of metastatic disease have led to new therapeutic approaches being investigated in the adjuvant setting. Observation is the only current standard of care after radical nephrectomy, although there is evidence of efficacy of adjuvant use of vaccine among all the strategies used. This article aims to collect published experiences with systemic adjuvant approaches in RCC and to describe the results of past and ongoing phase III clinical trials in this field. We explored all the systemic treatments, including chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted drugs while alternative approaches have also been described. Appropriate selection of patients who would benefit from adjuvant therapies remains a crucial dilemma. Although the international guidelines do not actually recommend any adjuvant treatment after radical surgery for RCC, no conclusions have yet been drawn pending the results of the promising ongoing clinical trials with the target therapies. The significant changes that these new drugs have made on advanced disease outcome could represent the key to innovation in terms of preventing recurrence, delaying relapse and prolonging survival after radical surgery for RCC.

scholarly journals Chronic lymphocytic leukemia paradigm continues to be refined: news from the American Society of Hematology 2018 annual meeting

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. IJH14
Author(s):  
Stefano Molica
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Prospective Phase ◽  
American Society ◽  
Anti Cd20

There were a number of important updates and advances presented at the 2018 Annual American Society of Hematology meeting. With respect to the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, the American Society of Hematology 2018 was notable for an improved understanding of ibrutinib-based therapies. In fact, three prospective Phase III trials presented at the meeting indicate, in turn, that ibrutinib alone, ibrutinib plus rituximab, or ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab, should be the new standard of care for chronic lymphocytic leukemia. However, additional clinical trials comparing chemo-immunotherapy with ibrutinib alone or in association with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody remain a reasonable avenue to complete results of these large studies.

scholarly journals Suggestions for improving the design of clinical trials in multiple sclerosis—results of a systematic analysis of completed phase III trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 425-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sinje Gehr ◽  
Thomas Kaiser ◽  
Reinhold Kreutz ◽  
Wolf-Dieter Ludwig ◽  
Friedemann Paul
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Progressive Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Systematic Overview ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

AbstractThis manuscript reviews the primary and secondary endpoints of pivotal phase III trials with immunomodulatory drugs in multiple sclerosis (MS). Considering the limitations of previous trial designs, we propose new standards for the planning of clinical trials, taking into account latest insights into MS pathophysiology and patient-relevant aspects. Using a systematic overview of published phase III (pivotal) trials performed as part of application for drug market approval, we evaluate the following characteristics: trial duration, number of trial participants, comparators, and endpoints (primary, secondary, magnetic resonance imaging outcome, and patient-reported outcomes). From a patient perspective, the primary and secondary endpoints of clinical trials are only partially relevant. High-quality trial data pertaining to efficacy and safety that stretch beyond the time frame of pivotal trials are almost non-existent. Understanding of long-term benefits and risks of disease-modifying MS therapy is largely lacking. Concrete proposals for the trial designs of relapsing (remitting) multiple sclerosis/clinically isolated syndrome, primary progressive multiple sclerosis, and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (e.g., study duration, mechanism of action, and choice of endpoints) are presented based on the results of the systematic overview. Given the increasing number of available immunotherapies, the therapeutic strategy in MS has shifted from a mere “relapse-prevention” approach to a personalized provision of medical care as to the choice of the appropriate drugs and their sequential application over the course of the disease. This personalized provision takes patient preferences as well as disease-related factors into consideration such as objective clinical and radiographic findings but also very burdensome symptoms such as fatigue, depression, and cognitive impairment. Future trial designs in MS will have to assign higher relevance to these patient-reported outcomes and will also have to implement surrogate measures that can serve as predictive markers for individual treatment response to new and investigational immunotherapies. This is an indispensable prerequisite to maximize the benefit of individual patients when participating in clinical trials. Moreover, such appropriate trial designs and suitable enrolment criteria that correspond to the mode of action of the study drug will facilitate targeted prevention of adverse events, thus mitigating risks for individual study participants.

scholarly journals Pattern of care and effectiveness of treatment for glioblastoma patients in the real world: Results from a prospective population-based registry. Could survival differ in a high-volume center?

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 166-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alba A. Brandes ◽  
Enrico Franceschi ◽  
Mario Ermani ◽  
Alicia Tosoni ◽  
Fiorenzo Albani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Methylation Status ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Treatment Center ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Pattern Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Emilia Romagna Region ◽  
High Volume Center

Abstract Background As yet, no population-based prospective studies have been conducted to investigate the incidence and clinical outcome of glioblastoma (GBM) or the diffusion and impact of the current standard therapeutic approach in newly diagnosed patients younger than aged 70 years. Methods Data on all new cases of primary brain tumors observed from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2010, in adults residing within the Emilia-Romagna region were recorded in a prospective registry in the Project of Emilia Romagna on Neuro-Oncology (PERNO). Based on the data from this registry, a prospective evaluation was made of the treatment efficacy and outcome in GBM patients. Results Two hundred sixty-seven GBM patients (median age, 64 y; range, 29–84 y) were enrolled. The median overall survival (OS) was 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.2–12.4). The 139 patients ≤aged 70 years who were given standard temozolomide treatment concomitant with and adjuvant to radiotherapy had a median OS of 16.4 months (95% CI, 14.0–18.5). With multivariate analysis, OS correlated significantly with KPS (HR = 0.458; 95% CI, 0.248–0.847; P = .0127), MGMT methylation status (HR = 0.612; 95% CI, 0.388–0.966; P = .0350), and treatment received in a high versus low-volume center (HR = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.328–0.986; P = .0446). Conclusions The median OS following standard temozolomide treatment concurrent with and adjuvant to radiotherapy given to (72.8% of) patients aged ≤70 years is consistent with findings reported from randomized phase III trials. The volume and expertise of the treatment center should be further investigated as a prognostic factor.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document