Do Early Phase Oncology Trials Predict Clinical Efficacy in Subsequent Biomarker-Enriched Phase III Randomized Trials?


Journal

Targeted oncology
ISSN: 1776-260X
Titre abrégé: Target Oncol
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101270595

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2022
Historique:
accepted: 16 09 2022
pubmed: 6 10 2022
medline: 26 11 2022
entrez: 5 10 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Promising early phase trial results of biomarker-targeted therapies have occasionally led to regulatory approval. We examined if early phase trials were predictive of efficacy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with matching treatment settings. Cancer drug RCTs conducted between January 2006 and March 2021 were identified through Clinicaltrials.gov. Biomarker-enriched RCTs and associated matching early phase trials were included. Trial pairs were compared using objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). We examined whether early phase trials results were associated with RCT results using logistic regression. The search yielded 2157 unique RCTs and 27 RCTs pairing with early phase trials were included. Based on average difference of trial pairs, ORR was similar (1.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.5 to 5.6, p = 0.50) and median PFS was higher in early phase trials (2.0 months; 95% CI 0.9-3.0, p < 0.05). On an individual pair basis, there was large variability in difference for ORR (range - 23.9 to 20.2%) and median PFS (range - 0.8 to 7.4 months). The probability of the RCT meeting its primary endpoint is 95% (95% prediction interval (PI) 72.8-99.3%) when the early phase trial ORR is 77.7%. Overall, in early phase trials, ORR has minimal bias and median PFS appears to be slightly overestimated. Substantial variability between trials suggests early phase trial results may be inconsistent with subsequent RCT. Early phase trial results may be associated with RCTs meeting their primary endpoint when ORR is very high; however, caution must be exercised when using early phase trials as representative of RCTs.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Promising early phase trial results of biomarker-targeted therapies have occasionally led to regulatory approval.
OBJECTIVE
We examined if early phase trials were predictive of efficacy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with matching treatment settings.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Cancer drug RCTs conducted between January 2006 and March 2021 were identified through Clinicaltrials.gov. Biomarker-enriched RCTs and associated matching early phase trials were included. Trial pairs were compared using objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). We examined whether early phase trials results were associated with RCT results using logistic regression.
RESULTS
The search yielded 2157 unique RCTs and 27 RCTs pairing with early phase trials were included. Based on average difference of trial pairs, ORR was similar (1.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.5 to 5.6, p = 0.50) and median PFS was higher in early phase trials (2.0 months; 95% CI 0.9-3.0, p < 0.05). On an individual pair basis, there was large variability in difference for ORR (range - 23.9 to 20.2%) and median PFS (range - 0.8 to 7.4 months). The probability of the RCT meeting its primary endpoint is 95% (95% prediction interval (PI) 72.8-99.3%) when the early phase trial ORR is 77.7%.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, in early phase trials, ORR has minimal bias and median PFS appears to be slightly overestimated. Substantial variability between trials suggests early phase trial results may be inconsistent with subsequent RCT. Early phase trial results may be associated with RCTs meeting their primary endpoint when ORR is very high; however, caution must be exercised when using early phase trials as representative of RCTs.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36197635
doi: 10.1007/s11523-022-00920-y
pii: 10.1007/s11523-022-00920-y
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antineoplastic Agents 0
Biomarkers 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

665-674

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Références

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) [Internet]. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c03234aa22abbed0380923a4cc6ab001&mc=true&node=se21.7.601_141&rgn=div8 [cited 2021 Aug 3].
Accelerated Approval | FDA. https://www.fda.gov/patients/fast-track-breakthrough-therapy-accelerated-approval-priority-review/accelerated-approval [cited 2021 Aug 3].
Billingham L, Malottki K, Steven N. Research methods to change clinical practice for patients with rare cancers. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(2):e70–80.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00396-4 pubmed: 26868356
Zia MI, Siu LL, Pond GR, Chen EX. Comparison of outcomes of phase II studies and subsequent randomized control studies using identical chemotherapeutic regimens. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(28):6982–91.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.679 pubmed: 16192585
Gyawali B, D’Andrea E, Franklin JM, Kesselheim AS. Response rates and durations of response for biomarker-based cancer drugs in nonrandomized versus randomized trials. JNCCN J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2020;18(1):36–43.
doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.7345
Chabner BA. Approval after phase I: ceritinib runs the three-minute mile. Oncologist. 2014;19(6):577–8.
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0143 pubmed: 24789171 pmcid: 4041677
Jänne PA, Shaw AT, Pereira JR, Jeannin G, Vansteenkiste J, Barrios C, et al. Selumetinib plus docetaxel for KRAS-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(1):38–47.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70489-8 pubmed: 23200175
Jänne PA, van den Heuvel MM, Barlesi F, Cobo M, Mazieres J, Crinò L, et al. Selumetinib plus docetaxel compared with docetaxel alone and progression-free survival in patients with KRAS-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer: the SELECT-1 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317(18):1844–53.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.3438 pubmed: 28492898 pmcid: 5815037
Selaru P, Tang Y, Huang B, Polli A, Wilner K, Donnelly E, et al. Sufficiency of single-arm studies to support registration of targeted agents in molecularly selected patients with cancer: lessons from the clinical development of crizotinib. Clin Transl Sci. 2016;9(2):63–73.
doi: 10.1111/cts.12388 pubmed: 26841346 pmcid: 5351315
Sharma MR, Schilsky RL. Role of randomized phase III trials in an era of effective targeted therapies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2012;9:208–14.
doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2011.190
Kazandjian D, Blumenthal GM, Luo L, He K, Fran I, Lemery S, et al. Benefit-risk summary of crizotinib for the treatment of patients with ROS1 alteration-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Oncologist. 2016;21(8):974–80.
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0101 pubmed: 27328934 pmcid: 4978556
DeLoughery EP, Prasad V. Without randomized studies, the costeffectiveness of a therapy cannot be known. Ann Oncol. 2018;29(3):527–9.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy008 pubmed: 29346605
Jürgensmeier JM, Eder JP, Herbst RS. New strategies in personalized medicine for solid tumors: molecular markers and clinical trial designs. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(17):4425–35.
doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0753 pubmed: 25183480 pmcid: 5369358
Jardim DL, Groves ES, Breitfeld PP, Kurzrock R. Factors associated with failure of oncology drugs in late-stage clinical development: a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev. 2017;52:12–21.
doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2016.10.009 pubmed: 27883925
Jardim DLF, Schwaederle M, Wei C, Lee JJ, Hong DS, Eggermont AM, et al. Impact of a biomarker-based strategy on oncology drug development: a meta-analysis of clinical trials leading to FDA approval. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(11):1–11.
Schwaederle M, Zhao M, Jack Lee J, Lazar V, Leyland-Jones B, Schilsky RL, et al. Association of biomarker-based treatment strategies with response rates and progression-free survival in refractory malignant neoplasms a meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(11):1452–9.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.2129 pubmed: 27273579
Schwaederle M, Zhao M, Lee JJ, Eggermont AM, Schilsky RL, Mendelsohn J, et al. Impact of precision medicine in diverse cancers: a meta-analysis of phase II clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(32):3817–25.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.5997 pubmed: 26304871 pmcid: 4737863
Shaw AT, Gandhi L, Gadgeel S, Riely GJ, Cetnar J, West H, et al. Alectinib in ALK-positive, crizotinib-resistant, non-small-cell lung cancer: a single-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(2):234–42.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00488-X pubmed: 26708155
Novello S, Mazières J, Oh I, De Castro J, Migliorino MR. Alectinib versus chemotherapy in crizotinib-pretreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: results from the phase III ALUR study. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:1409–16.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy121 pubmed: 29668860 pmcid: 6005013
U.S. Food and Drugs Administration. Drugs@FDA: FDA-Approved Drugs. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm .
Sammut C, Webb GI, editors. Mean absolute error. In: Encyclopedia of machine learning. Boston: Springer US; 2010. p. 652.
Meeker WQ, Hahn GJ, Escobar LA. Statistical intervals: a guide for practitioners and researchers. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 2017.
doi: 10.1002/9781118594841
Liang F, Wu Z, Mo M, Zhou C, Shen J, Wang Z, et al. Comparison of treatment effect from randomised controlled phase II trials and subsequent phase III trials using identical regimens in the same treatment setting. Eur J Cancer. 2019;121:19–28.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.08.006 pubmed: 31526874
Fassnacht M, Terzolo M, Allolio B, Baudin E, Haak H, Berruti A, et al. Combination chemotherapy in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(23):2189–97.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200966 pubmed: 22551107
Feinberg BA, Gajra A, Zettler ME, Phillips TD, Phillips EG, Kish JK. Use of real-world evidence to support FDA approval of oncology drugs. Value Health. 2020;23(10):1358–65.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.06.006 pubmed: 33032780
Meng X, Huang Z, Teng F, Xing L, Yu J. Predictive biomarkers in PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Cancer Treat Rev. 2015;41(10):868–76.
doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.11.001 pubmed: 26589760

Auteurs

Suji Udayakumar (S)

Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Sasha Thomson (S)

Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Albiruni R Abdul Razak (ARA)

Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Drug Development Program, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Kelvin K W Chan (KKW)

Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. kelvin.chan@sunnybrook.ca.
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. kelvin.chan@sunnybrook.ca.
Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Ave., T2-058, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada. kelvin.chan@sunnybrook.ca.
Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, ON, Canada. kelvin.chan@sunnybrook.ca.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH