Phase III trials in the molecularly targeted era: Characteristics of randomized clinical trials of cytotoxic versus molecularly targeted agents

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6641-6641
Author(s):  
L. Lee ◽  
E. X. Chen
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Molecularly Targeted Agents ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Cancer chemoprevention.

1994 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 851-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
S M Lippman ◽  
S E Benner ◽  
W K Hong
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Alpha Tocopherol ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Significant Activity ◽  
Chemopreventive Agents ◽  
Primary Tumors ◽  
End Point ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

PURPOSE To review the most important recent advances in clinical trials and biologic studies within the growing field of chemoprevention. METHODS The most critical methods issue concerns the definitive end point of phase III trials, which is now cancer incidence. This end point usually needs thousands of subjects monitored for 5 to 10 or more years to determine efficacy. Biologic markers of potential intermediate end points are under intensive study and may one day replace cancer incidence. Validated intermediate end point biomarkers could greatly reduce phase III trial populations, durations, and costs. RESULTS Randomized clinical trials over the last 5 years have produced significant activity in reversing oral, skin, colon, and cervical premalignancy; in preventing primary skin and stomach cancer; and in preventing second primary tumors associated with head and neck and lung cancer. These clinical advances have been paralleled at the basic science level by elegant molecular studies of premalignant carcinogenesis and of chemopreventive agents' mechanisms of action. One major laboratory advance is the discovery of nuclear retinoic acid receptors and strong evidence of their roles both in carcinogenic progression and in its response to retinoids. CONCLUSION Chemoprevention has matured greatly in recent years with the significant reversal or suppression of premalignancy by chemopreventive agents in several sites. The future of chemoprevention will be determined largely by several ongoing phase III trials, including trials of retinoids, beta-carotene, and alpha-tocopherol in the aerodigestive tract, of tamoxifen and fenretinide in the breast, and of finasteride in the prostate.

Design and interpretation of clinical trials that evaluate agents that may offer protection from the toxic effects of cancer chemotherapy.

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. 3179-3190 ◽  
Author(s):  
K A Phillips ◽  
I F Tannock
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Growth Factors ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Therapeutic Benefit ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Protective Agent ◽  
Protective Agents ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Biologic Activity ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

PURPOSE To review the features of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) used in the development of agents that may protect against chemotherapy-induced toxicities, including trials of the cardioprotective agent dexrazoxane, hematologic growth factors, and amifostine; to suggest recommendations based on information gained from such trials and improvements in the design of ongoing and future trials. METHODS Critical review of reports of RCTs obtained from a Medline search, references from these articles, and review of trials listed in the physician data query (PDQ) clinical trials data base. RESULTS Several of the phase III trials did not use a format of comparing widely accepted strategies of chemotherapy with and without a protective agent. Instead, patients in the control arms of some of the trials have been exposed to more prolonged use or increased dosage of toxic chemotherapy that placed them at greater risk of the toxicity the protective agent was designed to prevent (eg, cardiotoxicity in trials of dexrazoxane, myelosuppression or thrombocytopenia in trials of growth factors). CONCLUSION RCTs have shown clear evidence of biologic activity for the protective agents, but this does not imply therapeutic benefit as compared with alternative strategies such as avoidance of prolonged use of cardiotoxic agents or use of standard doses of chemotherapy. Ongoing and future trials of protective agents should be modified to avoid undue risk to patients.

scholarly journals Inflammation and cardiovascular diseases: lessons from seminal clinical trials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Liberale ◽  
Fabrizio Montecucco ◽  
Lena Schwarz ◽  
Thomas F Lüscher ◽  
Giovanni G Camici
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Inflammatory Cells ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Inflammatory Pathways ◽  
Pyrin Domain ◽  
Inflammatory Phase ◽  
Atherosclerotic Burden ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Abstract Inflammation has been long regarded as a key contributor to atherosclerosis. Inflammatory cells and soluble mediators play critical roles throughout arterial plaque development and accordingly, targeting inflammatory pathways effectively reduces atherosclerotic burden in animal models of cardiovascular (CV) diseases. Yet, clinical translation often led to inconclusive or even contradictory results. The Canakinumab Anti-inflammatory Thrombosis Outcome Study (CANTOS) followed by the Colchicine Cardiovascular Outcomes Trial (COLCOT) were the first two randomized clinical trials to convincingly demonstrate the effectiveness of specific anti-inflammatory treatments in the field of CV prevention, while other phase III trials—including the Cardiovascular Inflammation Reduction Trial one using methotrexate—were futile. This manuscript reviews the main characteristics and findings of recent anti-inflammatory Phase III trials in cardiology and discusses their similarities and differences in order to get further insights into the contribution of specific inflammatory pathways on CV outcomes. CANTOS and COLCOT demonstrated efficacy of two anti-inflammatory drugs (canakinumab and colchicine, respectively) in the secondary prevention of major adverse CV events (MACE) thus providing the first confirmation of the involvement of a specific inflammatory pathway in human atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD). Also, they highlighted the NOD-, LRR-, and pyrin domain-containing protein 3 inflammasome-related pathway as an effective therapeutic target to blunt ASCVD. In contrast, other trials interfering with a number of inflammasome-independent pathways failed to provide benefit. Lastly, all anti-inflammatory trials underscored the importance of balancing the risk of impaired host defence with an increase in infections and the prevention of MACE in CV patients with residual inflammatory risk.

What are the reciprocal influences of randomized clinical trials and the patient–psychiatrist relationship?

1999 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-100
Author(s):  
J. Catteau ◽  
C. Cyran ◽  
R. Bordet ◽  
C.E. Thomas ◽  
B.A. Dupuis
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Depressive Disorders ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Antidepressant Drugs ◽  
Antidepressant Medication ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials ◽  
Reciprocal Influences

SummaryThe goal of this prospective investigation was to study the course and the quality of patient-psychiatrist relationships during phase II / phase III clinical trials of antidepressant medication prescribed for depressive disorders. All patients who participated in the clinical trials (and subsequently in this survey) signed written informed consent statements and were subject to random double blind treatment assignment. Retrospective analysis of 118 investigations was carried out, and the patients involved were questioned concerning their experiences and impressions during and after the study. Data show that the outcome of clinical trials of antidepressant drugs are not a function of pre-existing good patient-psychiatrist relationships. On the other hand, no effects on the patient-psychiatrist relationship were found as a result of the experimental procedure, and it can be concluded that no detrimental effects on future patient-psychiatrist relationships were incurred.

scholarly journals Is Bayesian Analysis Ready for Use in Phase III Randomized Clinical Trials?

Stroke ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 36 (7) ◽  
pp. 1622-1623 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Howard ◽  
Christopher S. Coffey ◽  
Gary R. Cutter
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Bayesian Analysis ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase Iii

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 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.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the Value of Attribution in the Interpretation of Adverse Event Data: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Investigation

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (18) ◽  
pp. 3002-3007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shauna L. Hillman ◽  
Sumithra J. Mandrekar ◽  
Brian Bot ◽  
Ronald P. DeMatteo ◽  
Edith A. Perez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Treatment Group ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Oncology Group ◽  
North Central ◽  
American College Of Surgeons ◽  
Group Trial

Purpose In March 1998, Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) version 2.0 introduced the collection of attribution of adverse events (AEs) to study drug. We investigate whether attribution adds value to the interpretation of AE data. Patients and Methods Patients in the placebo arm of two phase III trials—North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial 97-24-51 (carboxyamino-triazole v placebo in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer) and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z9001 (imatinib mesylate v placebo after resection of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors)—were studied. Attribution was categorized as unrelated (not related or unlikely) and related (possible, probable, or definite). Results In total, 398 patients (84 from Trial 97-24-51 and 314 from Trial Z9001) and 7,736 AEs were included; 47% and 50% of the placebo-arm AEs, respectively, were reported as related. When the same AE was reported in the same patient on multiple visits, the attribution category changed at least once 36% and 31% of the time. AE type and sex (Trial Z9001) and AE type and performance status (Trial 97-24-51) were associated with a higher likelihood of AEs being deemed related. Conclusion Nearly 50% of AEs were reported as attributed to study drug on the placebo arm of two randomized clinical trials. These data provide strong evidence that AE attribution is difficult to determine, unreliable, and of questionable value in interpreting AE data in randomized clinical trials.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document