scholarly journals Trends in Phase II Trials for Cancer Therapies

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 178
Author(s):  
Faruque Azam ◽  
Alexei Vazquez
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Null Model ◽  
Surrogate Endpoint ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Drug Combinations ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Therapies ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Phase Ii Trials

Background: Drug combinations are the standard of care in cancer treatment. Identifying effective cancer drug combinations has become more challenging because of the increasing number of drugs. However, a substantial number of cancer drugs stumble at Phase III clinical trials despite exhibiting favourable efficacy in the earlier Phase. Methods: We analysed recent Phase II cancer trials comprising 2165 response rates to uncover trends in cancer therapies and used a null model of non-interacting agents to infer synergistic and antagonistic drug combinations. We compared our latest efficacy dataset with a previous dataset to assess the progress of cancer therapy. Results: Targeted therapies reach higher response rates when used in combination with cytotoxic drugs. We identify four synergistic and 10 antagonistic combinations based on the observed and expected response rates. We demonstrate that recent targeted agents have not significantly increased the response rates. Conclusions: We conclude that either we are not making progress or response rate measured by tumour shrinkage is not a reliable surrogate endpoint for the targeted agents.

scholarly journals Trends in Phase II trials for cancer therapies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faruque Azam ◽  
Alexei Vazquez
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Null Model ◽  
Surrogate Endpoint ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Drug Combinations ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Therapies ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Phase Ii Trials

AbstractBackgroundDrug combinations are the standard of care in cancer treatment. Identifying effective cancer drug combinations has become more challenging because of the increasing number of drugs. However, a substantial number of cancer drugs stumble at Phase III clinical trials despite exhibiting favourable efficacy in the earlier Phase.MethodsWe analysed recent Phase II cancer trials comprising 2,165 response rates to uncover trends in cancer therapies and used a null model of non-interacting agents to infer synergistic and antagonistic drug combinations. We compared our latest efficacy dataset with a previous dataset to assess the progress of cancer therapy.ResultsWe demonstrate that targeted therapies should be used in combination with cytotoxic drugs to reach high response rates. We identify 4 synergistic and 10 antagonistic combinations based on the observed and expected response rates. We also demonstrate that recent targeted agents have not significantly increased the response rates.ConclusionsWe conclude either we are not making progress or response rate measured by tumour shrinkage is not a reliable surrogate endpoint for the targeted agents.

Review of Phase II Trial Designs Used in Studies of Molecular Targeted Agents: Outcomes and Predictors of Success in Phase III

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1346-1354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert H. El-Maraghi ◽  
Elizabeth A. Eisenhauer
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Regulatory Approval ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
End Points ◽  
End Point

Purpose Because the appropriate design and end points for phase II evaluation of targeted anticancer agents are unclear, we undertook a review of recent reports of phase II trials of targeted agents to determine the types of designs used, the planned end points, the outcomes, and the relationship between trial outcomes and regulatory approval. Methods We retrieved reports of single-agent phase II trials in six solid tumors for 19 targeted drugs. For each, we abstracted data regarding planned design and actual results. Response rates were examined for any relationship to eventual success of the agents, as determined by US Food and Drug Administration approval for at least one indication. Results Eighty-nine trials were identified. Objective response was the primary or coprimary end point in the majority of trials (61 of 89 trials). Fourteen reports were of randomized studies generally evaluating different doses of agents, not as controlled experiments. Enrichment for target expression was uncommon. Objective responses were seen in 38 trials; in 19 trials, response rates were more than 10%, and in eight, they were more than 20%. Agents with high response rates tended to have high nonprogression rates; renal cell carcinoma was the exception to this. Higher overall response rates were predictive of regulatory approval in the tumor types reviewed (P = .005). Conclusion In practice, phase II design for targeted agents is similar to that for cytotoxics. Objective response seems to be a useful end point for screening new targeted agents because, in our review, its observation predicted for eventual success. Improvements in design are recommended, as is more frequent inclusion of biological questions as part of phase II trials.

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.

Design Issues of Randomized Phase II Trials and a Proposal for Phase II Screening Trials

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (28) ◽  
pp. 7199-7206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence V. Rubinstein ◽  
Edward L. Korn ◽  
Boris Freidlin ◽  
Sally Hunsberger ◽  
S. Percy Ivy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
False Positive ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
Targeted Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Treatment Control ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

Future progress in improving cancer therapy can be expedited by better prioritization of new treatments for phase III evaluation. Historically, phase II trials have been key components in the prioritization process. There has been a long-standing interest in using phase II trials with randomization against a standard-treatment control arm or an additional experimental arm to provide greater assurance than afforded by comparison to historic controls that the new agent or regimen is promising and warrants further evaluation. Relevant trial designs that have been developed and utilized include phase II selection designs, randomized phase II designs that include a reference standard-treatment control arm, and phase II/III designs. We present our own explorations into the possibilities of developing “phase II screening trials,” in which preliminary and nondefinitive randomized comparisons of experimental regimens to standard treatments are made (preferably using an intermediate end point) by carefully adjusting the false-positive error rates (α or type I error) and false-negative error rates (β or type II error), so that the targeted treatment benefit may be appropriate while the sample size remains restricted. If the ability to conduct a definitive phase III trial can be protected, and if investigators feel that by judicious choice of false-positive probability and false-negative probability and magnitude of targeted treatment effect they can appropriately balance the conflicting demands of screening out useless regimens versus reliably detecting useful ones, the phase II screening trial design may be appropriate to apply.

Non-randomised phase II trials of drug combinations

2002 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 635-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Van Glabbeke ◽  
W. Steward ◽  
J.P. Armand
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Drug Combinations ◽  
Phase Ii Trials

Biofeedback

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Lehrer
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Clinical Environment ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Psychosomatic Problems ◽  
Biofeedback Research

Although evidence supports the efficacy of biofeedback for treating a number of disorders and for enhancing performance, significant barriers block both needed research and payer support for this method. Biofeedback has demonstrated effects in changing psychophysiological substrates of various emotional, physical, and psychosomatic problems, but payers are reluctant to reimburse for biofeedback services. A considerable amount of biofeedback research is in the form of relatively small well-controlled trials (Phase II trials). This article argues for greater payer support and research support for larger trials in the “real life” clinical environment (Phase III trials) and meta-analytic reviews.

scholarly journals Targeting Angiogenesis in Prostate Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 2676 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zsombor Melegh ◽  
Sebastian Oltean
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Refractory Disease ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Angiogenic Activity ◽  
Angiogenic Therapy ◽  
Resistant Refractory ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among men in the Western world. Although localized disease can be effectively treated with established surgical and radiopharmaceutical treatments options, the prognosis of castration-resistant advanced prostate cancer is still disappointing. The objective of this study was to review the role of angiogenesis in prostate cancer and to investigate the effectiveness of anti-angiogenic therapies. A literature search of clinical trials testing the efficacy of anti-angiogenic therapy in prostate cancer was performed using Pubmed. Surrogate markers of angiogenic activity (microvessel density and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) expression) were found to be associated with tumor grade, metastasis, and prognosis. Six randomizedstudies were included in this review: two phase II trials on localized and hormone-sensitive disease (n = 60 and 99 patients) and four phase III trials on castration-resistant refractory disease (n = 873 to 1224 patients). Although the phase II trials showed improved relapse-free survival and stabilisation of the disease, the phase III trials found increased toxicity and no significant improvement in overall survival. Although angiogenesis appears to have an important role in prostate cancer, the results of anti-angiogenic therapy in castration-resistant refractory disease have hitherto been disappointing. There are various possible explanations for this lack of efficacy in castration-resistant refractory disease: redundancy of angiogenic pathways, molecular heterogeneity of the disease, loss of tumor suppressor protein phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) expression as well as various VEGF-A splicing isoforms with pro- and anti-angiogenic activity. A better understanding of the molecular mechanisms of angiogenesis may help to develop effective anti-angiogenic therapy in prostate cancer.

scholarly journals Anti-Angiogenic Agents in Management of Sarcoma Patients: Overview of Published Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre-Yves Cren ◽  
Loïc Lebellec ◽  
Thomas Ryckewaert ◽  
Nicolas Penel
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitors ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

We reviewed all fully published clinical trials assessing anti-angiogenic agents in sarcoma patients (last issue, January 13, 2020). Anti-angiogenic macromolecules (e.g., bevacizumab or ombrabulin) provide disappointing results. Many multikinase inhibitors have been assessed with non-randomized phase II trials with limited samples and without stratification according to histological subtypes, therefore interpretation of such trials is very challenging. On the contrary, pazopanib, regorafenib, and sorafenib have been assessed using double-blind placebo-controlled randomized phase II or phase III trials. Compared to placebo, sorafenib demonstrates activity in desmoid-type fibromatosis patients. Based on results of phase 3 trial, pazopanib had obtained approval for treatment of pretreated non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcoma. Regorafenib is currently assessed in several clinical settings and provides significant improvement of progression-free survival in pre-treated non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcoma and in advanced pretreated osteosarcoma. Multikinase inhibitors are a breakthrough in sarcoma management. Many trials are ongoing. Nevertheless, predictive factors are still missing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document