Evolution of statistical methodology and design of phase II/III clinical trials in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7108-7108 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. K. Bagai ◽  
A. Dowlati
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Survival Time ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Improvement In Survival ◽  
Phase Ii And Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Studies

7108 Background: A significant heterogeneity exists in the design and reporting of phase II and III therapeutic clinical trials in NSCLC. This has led to difficulty in interpretation of these trials leading to over- or underestimation of therapeutic efficacy. We set out to investigate the statistical methodology and design reporting of chemotherapeutic trials in NSCLC published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO) over 20 years. Methods: We identified all phase II and III NSCLC chemotherapy trials published in the JCO from January 1983 to August 2005. All manuscripts were reviewed to evaluate components of statistical design that were reported, including: sample size calculation, power, type I error, single or multiple drug trials, relative response sought in phase II trials and improvement in survival time or response rate sought in phase III trials. Results: One hundred forty eight trials were identified. 52% of studies were phase III and 48% were phase II. The majority (78%) were conducted in advanced stage NSCLC. Sample size calculations were reported for only 58% of phase III studies and 31% of phase II studies. Power was reported in 66% of phase III studies and 13% of phase II trials. Type I error was reported in 47% of phase III studies and 17% in phase II studies. 60% of phase III trials defined endpoints (percentage improvement in survival time, improvement in survival time in months or increase in response rate). 41% of phase II trails defined the target response rate, ranging from response rates of 15% to 70%. The frequency of adequate reporting of statistical design was shown to increase from 31% in 1990–1995 to 64% in 2000–2005 ( table ). Conclusions: Significant heterogeneity exists in trial design and reporting of phase II and III trials in NSCLC. This impacts the ability to adequately interpret these studies. More widespread application of statistical methods in planning and reporting of lung cancer clinical trials are necessary to increase reliability of data. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Predictive value of phase II clinical trials in pancreatic cancer: Rethinking the road to progress.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4036-4036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Halperin ◽  
J. Jack Lee ◽  
James C. Yao
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Type Ii ◽  
Type Ii Error ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Fda Approval

4036 Background: Few new therapies for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC) have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), reflecting frequent failures in phase III trials. We hypothesize that the high failure rate in large trials is due to a low predictive value for “positive” phase II studies. Methods: Given a median time from initiation of clinical trials to FDA approval of 6.3 years, we conducted a systematic search of the clinicaltrials.gov database for phase II interventional trials of antineoplastic therapy in PC initiated from 1999-2004. We reviewed drug labels and NCCN guidelines for FDA approval and guideline recommendations. Results: We identified 70 phase II trials that met our inclusion criteria. Forty-five evaluated compounds without preexisting FDA approval, 23 evaluated drugs approved in other diseases, and 2 evaluated cellular therapies. With a median follow-up of 12.5 years, none of these drugs gained FDA approval in PC. Four trials, all combining chemotherapy with radiation, eventually resulted in NCCN recommendations. Forty-two of the trials have been published. Of 16 studies providing pre-specified type I error rates, these rates were ≥0.1 in 8 studies, 0.05 in 6 studies and <0.025 in 2 studies. Of 21 studies specifying type II error rates, 7 used >0.1, 10 used 0.1, and 4 used <0.1. Published studies reported a median enrollment of 47 subjects. Fourteen trials reported utilizing a randomized design. Conclusions: The low rate of phase II trials resulting in eventual regulatory approval of therapies for PC reflects the challenge of conquering a tough disease as well as deficiencies in the statistical designs. New strategies are necessary to quantify and improve odds of success in drug development. Statistical parameters of individual or coupled phase II trials should be tailored to achieve the desired predictive value prior to initiating pivotal phase III studies. Positive predictive value of a phase II study assuming a 1%, 2%, or 5% prior probability of success and 10% type II error rate. [Table: see text]

Model-based predictions of expected anti-tumor response and survival in phase III studies based on phase II data of an investigational agent

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6025-6025 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Claret ◽  
P. Girard ◽  
J. O’shaughnessy ◽  
P. Hoff ◽  
E. Van Cutsem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Time ◽  
Clinical Response ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Tumor Response ◽  
Survival Model ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Phase Iii Studies

6025 Background: Decision making during early oncology drug development remains very empirical. A drug-disease simulation model to predict expected clinical response and survival in phase III studies from observed longitudinal tumor size in phase II trials offers a science-based alternative. Methods: We developed the following: 1) longitudinal exposure-response models of drug effect (and resistance) on tumor growth dynamics based on phase II data on capecitabine (X) in metastatic breast (MBC) and colorectal cancer (MCRC) and on historical phase III data on docetaxel (T) in MBC and 5-FU in MCRC; and 2) a survival model relating change in tumor size and patient characteristics to survival time in MBC and MCRC based on phase III data. The models were validated and used to predict expected anti-tumor response and survival in phase III studies of XT vs. T alone in MBC and X vs. 5-FU in MCRC. Multiple replicates (n = 1000) of simulated phase III studies were compared to actual results. Results: Change of tumor size and survival time distributions in X arms were well predicted. In MBC, expected median (90% prediction interval) survival for patients treated with XT was 412 (range 330 to 526) days (vs. 431 days observed) with an improvement over T of 57 days (range -17 to 148) (vs. 78 days observed). For MCRC patients, X treatment resulted in a potential survival improvement of 39 (range -21 to 110) days (vs. 35 days observed) compared to patients treated with 5-FU. Conclusions: The dose-tumor size-survival model succeeded in predicting survival in phase III trials based on X phase II data in MBC (in combination with T) and as a single agent in MCRC. This model is a useful tool to compare expected clinical response of new compounds to various competitors and to support end-of-phase II decisions and design of phase III studies. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Unconventional Anticancer Agents: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Vickers ◽  
Joyce Kuo ◽  
Barrie R. Cassileth
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Dose Finding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Off Label

Purpose A substantial number of cancer patients turn to treatments other than those recommended by mainstream oncologists in an effort to sustain tumor remission or halt the spread of cancer. These unconventional approaches include botanicals, high-dose nutritional supplementation, off-label pharmaceuticals, and animal products. The objective of this study was to review systematically the methodologies applied in clinical trials of unconventional treatments specifically for cancer. Methods MEDLINE 1966 to 2005 was searched using approximately 200 different medical subject heading terms (eg, alternative medicine) and free text words (eg, laetrile). We sought prospective clinical trials of unconventional treatments in cancer patients, excluding studies with only symptom control or nonclinical (eg, immune) end points. Trial data were extracted by two reviewers using a standardized protocol. Results We identified 14,735 articles, of which 214, describing 198 different clinical trials, were included. Twenty trials were phase I, three were phase I and II, 70 were phase II, and 105 were phase III. Approximately half of the trials investigated fungal products, 20% investigated other botanicals, 10% investigated vitamins and supplements, and 10% investigated off-label pharmaceuticals. Only eight of the phase I trials were dose-finding trials, and a mere 20% of phase II trials reported a statistical design. Of the 27 different agents tested in phase III, only one agent had a prior dose-finding trial, and only for three agents was the definitive study initiated after the publication of phase II data. Conclusion Unconventional cancer treatments have not been subject to appropriate early-phase trial development. Future research on unconventional therapies should involve dose-finding and phase II studies to determine the suitability of definitive trials.

PrabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Glabellar Lines

2020 ◽  
pp. 106002802094352
Author(s):  
Mary B. Gadarowski ◽  
Rima I. Ghamrawi ◽  
Sarah L. Taylor ◽  
Steven R. Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type A ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials ◽  
Study Selection ◽  
Pubmed Database ◽  
Phase Ii And Iii

Objective: PrabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs (Jeuveau), a botulinum toxin type A, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the temporary improvement in the appearance of moderate-to-severe glabellar lines in February 2019. This article will review phase II and III clinical trials to assess the efficacy, safety, and clinical application of this novel, aesthetic-only drug. Data sources: A systematic literature review was performed using the terms “glabellar lines AND prabotulinumtoxinA” in the PubMed database. ClinicalTrials.gov was searched to identify nonpublished studies. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Articles written in English between November 2019 and June 2020 discussing phase II and phase III clinical trials were evaluated. Data Synthesis: By the primary efficacy end point on day 30, more patients achieved a greater than 2-point improvement on the Glabellar Line Scale (GLS) at maximum frown compared with baseline on day 0. The proportions of participants who responded to treatment with prabotulinumtoxinA were 67.5% and 70.4% versus 1.2% and 1.3% in placebo groups across 2 identical clinical trials ( P < 0.001). Patients receiving prabotulinumtoxinA experienced greater improvement in GLS at maximum frown on day 30 (87.2%) compared with onabotulinumtoxinA (82.8%) and placebo (4.2%; P < 0.001). PrabotulinumtoxinA was well tolerated across all studies. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review provides a detailed analysis of the safety and efficacy of prabotulinumtoxinA-xvfs and includes special considerations to help guide patients and clinicians. Conclusion: PrabotulinumtoxinA is a safe and effective new addition to the repository of available treatments for the appearance of glabellar lines.

Treating Psoriasis With Halobetasol Propionate and Tazarotene Combination: A Review of Phase II and III Clinical Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (9) ◽  
pp. 872-878
Author(s):  
Vignesh Ramachandran ◽  
Brooke Bertus ◽  
Arjun M. Bashyam ◽  
Steven R. Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Patient Adherence ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Global Assessment Scale ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Psoriasis Treatment ◽  
Phase Ii And Iii

Objective: To review phase II and III clinical trial data to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the halobetasol propionate/tazarotene (HP/TAZ) combination lotion (Duobrii), a medication approved by the Food and Drug Administration in April 2019 for adults with plaque psoriasis. Data Sources: A systematic search (January 2005 to July 2019) of MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE databases was performed using the terms halobetasol, tazarotene, halobetasol/tazarotene, Duobrii, and IDP-118. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant English-language articles reporting on phase II and phase III clinical trials were included. Data from the individual trials were extracted independently and then cross-checked to ensure accuracy. Data Synthesis: HP/TAZ was safe and efficacious compared with HP alone, TAZ alone, or vehicle. More patients achieved treatment success, described as a ≥2-grade improvement on Investigator Global Assessment Scale, over 8 weeks of treatment and at the 4-week follow-up after treatment cessation. The most common adverse events were dermatitis, pain, and pruritus, which occurred more often in the TAZ groups compared with the HP/TAZ cohorts. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: The once-daily HP/TAZ combination lotion simplifies psoriasis treatment and may facilitate adherence, which may improve psoriasis outcomes. Conclusions: HP/TAZ combination lotion is efficacious and safe for plaque psoriasis treatment, with more patients achieving end points and fewer side effects than in HP, TAZ, or vehicle-treated controls. Drug synergy may play a role. Importantly, patient adherence to a once-daily combinational therapy is likely to contribute to efficacy.

Capecitabine and irinotecan (XELIRI) in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): A systematic review of controlled clinical trials

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15100-e15100
Author(s):  
S. Sukumaran ◽  
N. Pavlakis ◽  
K. B. Pittman ◽  
K. Patterson ◽  
T. J. Price
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Hand Foot Syndrome ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Phase Ii And Iii ◽  
First Line Treatment

e15100 Background: Irinotecan and 5-Fluorouracil based combination is an effective regimen for mCRC. Capecitabine, an oral fluoropyrimidine, is a convenient alternative to intravenous 5- Fluorouracil. This study aims to systematically review all published and unpublished controlled phase II and III trials of XELIRI combination, used in first line treatment of mCRC, reported from 2000–2008, to describe its efficacy and safety. Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and proceedings from ASCO, ESMO and WGIC was conducted. The primary end point was response rate (RR), secondary endpoints include: time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: Thirty non-randomised phase II trials (n = 1380) along with 6 randomised phase II and 3 phase III trials, were included (pooled n = 1478). The daily dose of capecitabine ranged from 1,800 mg/m2 to 2,500 mg/m2 for 7 to 14 days per cycle and the dose of irinotecan varied from 180mg/m2 to 350 mg/m2, over a 3 week period per cycle. Amongst the non-randomised studies, the median patient age was 61 years (53–72).The median RR was 46.75% (25–78%). The median reported TTP was 7.9 months (mo) (5- 9.9 mo) and the median OS was 15.6 months (7–24.8 mo). Grade 3–4 toxicity incidence was: diarrhoea (21.5%), neutropenia (12%), vomiting (12.5%), fatigue (6%) and Hand-foot syndrome (6%). The pooled incidence of febrile neutropenia was 2.5%. Amongst the randomised trials, the comparator regimens were XELOX or FOLFIRI. Median age was 65 years (61–74). RR for XELIRI was 39% (34–56%) compared to 47% (27–61.8%) for the non XELIRI comparator arms. Median reported TTP was 8.2 mo (5.7–12.5 mo) for the XELIRI arms and 9.2 mo for the comparator arms. Conclusions: XELIRI is an effective and feasible regime in the first line management of mCRC. However the optimal role of this combination remains to be established. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Personalized use of metronomic cyclophosphamide for DNA repair deficient castration-resistant prostate cancer: A phase II trial.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS346-TPS346
Author(s):  
Cameron Phillips ◽  
Giulio Francia ◽  
Robert S. Kerbel ◽  
Urban Emmenegger
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Type I ◽  
Similar Response ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Castration Resistant

TPS346 Background: There is a continued need to identify novel targets for the treatment of metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). DNA damage repair (DDR) aberrations are emerging as such a target: 20%-30% of mCRPCs harbor DDR gene aberrations, rendering tumors particularly sensitive to DNA damaging agents and poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) therapy. 88% of men with DDR deficient mCRPC responded to the PARPi olaparib in a phase II trial, whereas in unselected mCRPC patients the metronomic use of the DNA damaging agent cyclophosphamide (CPA) resulted in response rates of 25-60%. Intriguingly, in randomized phase II trials of unselected ovarian and triple-negative breast cancer (ie tumor types enriched for DDR defects), metronomic CPA alone was as active as metronomic CPA plus the PARPi veliparib. Based on this we hypothesize that DDR deficient mCRPC is particularly sensitive to metronomic CPA. To the best of our knowledge this is the first attempt to utilize metronomic CPA in a personalized manner. Our study has the potential to define metronomic CPA as an affordable and well-tolerated alternative to PARPi therapy in men with DDR deficient mCRPC. Methods: To study if metronomic CPA achieves a similar response rate (ie ≥85%) in DDR deficient mCRPC as seen with olaparib, men with mCRPC progressing after 1-2 lines of systemic therapy will undergo circulating tumor DNA based testing for BRCA1/2 or ATM aberrations. Patients with such aberrations will proceed with metronomic CPA (50 mg po daily). Primary endpoint: RECIST 1.1 and/or ≥50% PSA response rate at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints include biochemical, radiological and clinical progression-free survival. Applying the Optimal Simon's Two-Stage design, and using a type I error rate of 0.05 and a power of 0.8, in the first stage we plan to enroll 14 patients. If there are ≤10 or fewer responses, the study will be stopped. Otherwise, another 19 patients will be accrued as part of the second stage.

scholarly journals Rational Clinical Experiment: Assessing Prior Probability and Its Impact on the Success of Phase II Clinical Trials

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (26) ◽  
pp. 2914-2919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Halperin ◽  
J. Jack Lee ◽  
Cecile Gonzales Dagohoy ◽  
James C. Yao
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Prior Probability ◽  
Type I Error ◽  
Drug Approval ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Phase Ii Studies ◽  
Therapeutic Decisions

Purpose Despite a robust clinical trial enterprise and encouraging phase II results, the vast minority of oncologic drugs in development receive regulatory approval. In addition, clinicians occasionally make therapeutic decisions based on phase II data. Therefore, clinicians, investigators, and regulatory agencies require improved understanding of the implications of positive phase II studies. We hypothesized that prior probability of eventual drug approval was significantly different across GI cancers, with substantial ramifications for the predictive value of phase II studies. Methods We conducted a systematic search of phase II studies conducted between 1999 and 2004 and compared studies against US Food and Drug Administration and National Cancer Institute databases of approved indications for drugs tested in those studies. Results In all, 317 phase II trials were identified and followed for a median of 12.5 years. Following completion of phase III studies, eventual new drug application approval rates varied from 0% (zero of 45) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma to 34.8% (24 of 69) for colon adenocarcinoma. The proportion of drugs eventually approved was correlated with the disease under study (P < .001). The median type I error for all published trials was 0.05, and the median type II error was 0.1, with minimal variation. By using the observed median type I error for each disease, phase II studies have positive predictive values ranging from less than 1% to 90%, depending on primary site of the cancer. Conclusion Phase II trials in different GI malignancies have distinct prior probabilities of drug approval, yielding quantitatively and qualitatively different predictive values with similar statistical designs. Incorporation of prior probability into trial design may allow for more effective design and interpretation of phase II studies.

scholarly journals Focusing on the Treatment of COVID-19: A Comprehensive Analysis of 226 Trials Registered on Clinicaltrials.gov and ChiCTR

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jincai Guo ◽  
Hui Xie ◽  
Hao Wu
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Chinese Medicine ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Western Medicine ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intervention Measures ◽  
Chinese Medicine Treatment

Abstract Background: The purpose of this study is to analyze the registered clinical trials of COVID-19, and to provide a reference for the clinical treatment of COVID-19. Methods: Chinese ClinicalTrial Registry (ChiCTR) and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for clinical trials of COVID-19, which were registered from inception to February 29, 2020, to screen out the clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19, and the research units and regions, sample size, study types, study stages, and intervention measures were analyzed. Results: There were 226 clinical trials on COVID-19 in the 2 databases, and all of them were registered by research units in China. The top five registered areas were Hubei, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong, and Zhejiang. The study type was as follows: interventional study (207, 91.6%) and observational study (18, 8.0%). Clinical trial staging was as follows: exploratory studies/preliminary trials (91, 40.3%), phase I trials (4, 1.8%), phase II trials (12, 5.3%), phase III trials (12, 5.3%), phase IV trials (47, 20.8%), phase I/II trials (2, 0.9%), phase II/III trials (5, 2.2%), and other trials (57, 25.2%). Intervention measures were as follows: there were 143 (63.3%) trials of western medicine treatment, 50 (22.1%) trials of Chinese medicine treatment, and 21 (9.3%) trials of integrated Chinese medicine treatment and western medicine treatment. Conclusion: Researchers have registered a large number of clinical trials in a short time. The number of existing patients of COVID-19 is not enough to support hundreds of clinical trials. There is a lack of multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

Phase II Trial of N,N-Diethyl-2-[4-(phenylmethyl)phenoxy]ethanamine.HCl and Doxorubicin Chemotherapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 3431-3437 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Khoo ◽  
L. Brandes ◽  
L. Reyno ◽  
A. Arnold ◽  
S. Dent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Phase Iii

PURPOSE: This multicenter phase II trial investigated the efficacy and toxicity of a combination of the novel intracellular histamine antagonist, N,N-diethyl-2-[4-(phenylmethyl)phenoxy]ethanamine.HCl (DPPE), and doxorubicin in patients with anthracycline-naïve metastatic breast cancer. Preclinical models and early single institutional studies suggested DPPE could potentiate the cytotoxicity of doxorubicin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-two women, 32 to 77 years old (median, 59 years), with anthracycline-naïve metastatic breast cancer were treated. Patients may have had one previous regimen of nonanthracycline chemotherapy, either in the adjuvant or metastatic disease treatment setting. DPPE (6 mg/kg) was administered as an 80 minute intravenous infusion with doxorubicin (60 mg/m2) given intravenously over the last 20 minutes of the DPPE infusion. Patients were premedicated with an antiemetic and sedating regimen. The DPPE/doxorubicin treatment was given every 21 days for a maximum of seven cycles. RESULTS: All 42 patients were assessable. Overall, toxicity was comparable to that expected with doxorubicin alone, with the exception of DPPE-related motion sickness, mild hallucinations, and cerebellar signs at the time of the infusion. These CNS side effects were manageable in an ambulatory care setting, improved with subsequent cycles of treatment, and did not usually require hospitalization. Four patients developed febrile neutropenia. Thirty-five patients received four or more cycles of chemotherapy. The overall response rate was 52.5% (95% confidence interval, 36% to 68%), with 9.5% complete responses (n = 4), 43% partial responses (n = 18), and 38% of patients with stable disease (n = 16). CONCLUSION: The antitumour effects of DPPE/doxorubicin the 52.5% response rate seems encouraging, particularly in consideration of the fact that a recently reported randomized National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group trial using single-agent doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 in one of the treatment arms achieved a 31% response rate. Thus, a randomized phase III trial of doxorubicin versus doxorubicin plus DPPE is being conducted in this clinical setting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document