Abstract
The accelerating science of molecular profiling has necessitated a rapid evolution in clinical trial design. Traditional clinical research begins with Phase I studies to characterize dose-limiting toxicities and defines maximally tolerated doses of drugs in small numbers of patients. Traditional Phase II studies test these drugs at the doses discovered during Phase I drug development in small numbers of patients evaluating efficacy and safety. Phase III studies test new therapies to demonstrate improved activity or improved tolerability compared with a standard of care regimen or a placebo. The rapid advances in the understanding of signal transduction, and the identification of new potential diagnostic and therapeutic targets, now require the design and implementation of molecular clinical trials that are very different than traditional Phase I, II, or III trials. The main differentiating factor is the use of a molecular end point to stratify a subset of patients to receive a specific treatment regimen. This chapter focuses on the issues surrounding (a) the definition of clinical end points and the assessment of tumor response; (b) clinical trial design models to define the targeted pathway; and (c) the need for appropriate biomarkers to monitor the response.
Key words
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Pazdur, R. (2008) Endpoints for assessing drug activity in clinical trials. Oncologist 13 Suppl 2, 19–21.
Glynne-Jones, R., Mawdsley, S., Pearce, T., Buyse, M. (2006) Alternative clinical end points in rectal cancer--are we getting closer? Ann Oncol 17, 1239–48.
Schuetze, S. M., Baker, L. H., Benjamin, R. S., Canetta, R. (2008) Selection of response criteria for clinical trials of sarcoma treatment. Oncologist 13 Suppl 2, 32–40.
Scott, J., McGettigan, G. (2005) Regulatory approvals for oncology products based on accelerated clinical development and limited data packages-2. Regulatory Rapporteur 2, 6–15.
Therasse, P., Arbuck, S. G., Eisenhauer, E. A., Wanders, J., Kaplan, R. S., Rubinstein, L. et al. (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92, 205–16.
Llovet, J. M., Ricci, S., Mazzaferro, V., Hilgard, P., Gane, E., Blanc, J. F. et al. (2008) Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 359, 378–90.
Alves, R. C., Alves, D., Guz, B., Matos, C., Viana, M., Harriz, M. et al. (2011) Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Review of targeted molecular drugs. Ann Hepatol 10, 21–7.
Escudier, B., Eisen, T., Stadler, W. M., Szczylik, C., Oudard, S., Siebels, M. et al. (2007) Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 356, 125–34.
Eisenhauer, E. A., Therasse, P., Bogaerts, J., Schwartz, L. H., Sargent, D., Ford, R. et al. (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45, 228–47.
Hillner, B. E., Siegel, B. A., Liu, D., Shields, A. F., Gareen, I. F., Hanna, L. et al. (2008) Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Clin Oncol 26, 2155–61.
Evelhoch, J., Garwood, M., Vigneron, D., Knopp, M., Sullivan, D., Menkens, A. et al. (2005) Expanding the use of magnetic resonance in the assessment of tumor response to therapy: workshop report. Cancer Res 65, 7041–4.
van Rijswijk, C. S., Geirnaerdt, M. J., Hogendoorn, P. C., Peterse, J. L., van Coevorden, F., Taminiau, A. H. et al. (2003) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in monitoring response to isolated limb perfusion in high-grade soft tissue sarcoma: initial results. Eur Radiol 13, 1849–58.
Reid, A. H., Baird, R., Workman, P. (2008) Emerging molecular therapies: Drugs interfering with signal transduction pathways, in Principles of Molecular Oncology (Bronchud, M. H., Foote, M., Giaccone, G., Olopade, O., and Workman, P., ed.), Humana Press, Totowa, NJ, pp. 325–329.
Weissman, C. H., Reynolds, C. H., Neubauer, M. A., Pritchard, S., Kobina, S., Asmar, L. (2011) A phase III randomized trial of gemcitabine-oxaliplatin versus carboplatin-paclitaxel as first-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 6, 358–64.
Therasse, P., Carbonnelle, S., Bogaerts, J. (2006) Clinical trials design and treatment tailoring: general principles applied to breast cancer research. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 59, 98–105.
Mandrekar, S. J., Sargent, D. J. (2009) Clinical trial designs for predictive biomarker validation: theoretical considerations and practical challenges. J Clin Oncol 27, 4027–34.
Mandrekar, S. J., Sargent, D. J. (2010) Predictive biomarker validation in practice: lessons from real trials. Clin Trials 7, 567–73.
Scagliotti, G. V., Parikh, P., von Pawel, J., Biesma, B., Vansteenkiste, J., Manegold, C. et al. (2008) Phase III study comparing cisplatin plus gemcitabine with cisplatin plus pemetrexed in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 26, 3543–51.
Paik, S., Shak, S., Tang, G., Kim, C., Baker, J., Cronin, M. et al. (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351, 2817–26.
Paik, S., Tang, G., Shak, S., Kim, C., Baker, J., Kim, W. et al. (2006) Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 24, 3726–34.
van de Vijver, M. J., He, Y. D., van’t Veer, L. J., Dai, H., Hart, A. A., Voskuil, D. W. et al. (2002) A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347, 1999–2009.
van ‘t Veer, L. J., Dai, H., van de Vijver, M. J., He, Y. D., Hart, A. A., Mao, M. et al. (2002) Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415, 530–6.
Sparano, J. A. (2006) TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx). Clin Breast Cancer 7, 347–50.
Sparano, J. A., Paik, S. (2008) Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 26, 721–8.
Oakman, C., Santarpia, L., Di Leo, A. (2010) Breast cancer assessment tools and optimizing adjuvant therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7, 725–32.
Ross, J. S., Hatzis, C., Symmans, W. F., Pusztai, L., Hortobagyi, G. N. (2008) Commercialized multigene predictors of clinical outcome for breast cancer. Oncologist 13, 477–93.
Bogaerts, J., Cardoso, F., Buyse, M., Braga, S., Loi, S., Harrison, J. A. et al. (2006) Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 3, 540–51.
Cardoso, F., Van’t Veer, L., Rutgers, E., Loi, S., Mook, S., Piccart-Gebhart, M. J. (2008) Clinical application of the 70-gene profile: the MINDACT trial. J Clin Oncol 26, 729–35.
Schaeybroeck, S. V., Allen, W. L., Turkington, R. C., Johnston, P. G. (2011) Implementing prognostic and predictive biomarkers in CRC clinical trials. Nat Rev Clin Oncol doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2011.15
Jacobs, T. W., Gown, A. M., Yaziji, H., Barnes, M. J., Schnitt, S. J. (1999) Specificity of HercepTest in determining HER-2/neu status of breast cancers using the United States Food and Drug Administration-approved scoring system. J Clin Oncol 17, 1983–7.
Elkin, E. B., Weinstein, M. C., Winer, E. P., Kuntz, K. M., Schnitt, S. J., Weeks, J. C. (2004) HER-2 testing and trastuzumab therapy for metastatic breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Oncol 22, 854–63.
Bartlett, J. M., Going, J. J., Mallon, E. A., Watters, A. D., Reeves, J. R., Stanton, P. et al. (2001) Evaluating HER2 amplification and overexpression in breast cancer. J Pathol 195, 422–8.
Goldenberg, M. M. (1999) Trastuzumab, a recombinant DNA-derived humanized monoclonal antibody, a novel agent for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Clin Ther 21, 309–18.
Wolff, A. C., Hammond, M. E., Schwartz, J. N., Hagerty, K. L., Allred, D. C., Cote, R. J. et al. (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 131, 18–43.
Roche, P. C., Suman, V. J., Jenkins, R. B., Davidson, N. E., Martino, S., Kaufman, P. A. et al. (2002) Concordance between local and central laboratory HER2 testing in the breast intergroup trial N9831. J Natl Cancer Inst 94, 855–7.
McShane, L. M., Altman, D. G., Sauerbrei, W., Taube, S. E., Gion, M., Clark, G. M. (2005) REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Br J Cancer 93, 387–91.
Baselga, J., Tripathy, D., Mendelsohn, J., Baughman, S., Benz, C. C., Dantis, L. et al. (1996) Phase II study of weekly intravenous recombinant humanized anti-p185HER2 monoclonal antibody in patients with HER2/neu-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 14, 737–44.
Arteaga, C. L., Baselga, J. (2003) Clinical trial design and end points for epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapies: implications for drug development and practice. Clin Cancer Res 9, 1579–89.
Slamon, D. J., Leyland-Jones, B., Shak, S., Fuchs, H., Paton, V., Bajamonde, A. et al. (2001) Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med 344, 783–92.
Ciardiello, F., Tortora, G. (2008) EGFR antagonists in cancer treatment. N Engl J Med 358, 1160–74.
Jonker, D. J., O’Callaghan, C. J., Karapetis, C. S., Zalcberg, J. R., Tu, D., Au, H. J. et al. (2007) Cetuximab for the treatment of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 357, 2040–8.
Karapetis, C. S., Khambata-Ford, S., Jonker, D. J., O’Callaghan, C. J., Tu, D., Tebbutt, N. C. et al. (2008) K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 359, 1757–65.
Amado, R. G., Wolf, M., Peeters, M., Van Cutsem, E., Siena, S., Freeman, D. J. et al. (2008) Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26, 1626–34.
Lynch, T. J., Bell, D. W., Sordella, R., Gurubhagavatula, S., Okimoto, R. A., Brannigan, B. W. et al. (2004) Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib. N Engl J Med 350, 2129–39.
Paez, J. G., Janne, P. A., Lee, J. C., Tracy, S., Greulich, H., Gabriel, S. et al. (2004) EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science 304, 1497–500.
Sequist, L. V., Martins, R. G., Spigel, D., Grunberg, S. M., Spira, A., Janne, P. A. et al. (2008) First-line gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harboring somatic EGFR mutations. J Clin Oncol 26, 2442–9.
Sheehan, K. M., Calvert, V. S., Kay, E. W., Lu, Y., Fishman, D., Espina, V. et al. (2005) Use of reverse phase protein microarrays and reference standard development for molecular network analysis of metastatic ovarian carcinoma. Mol Cell Proteomics 4, 346–55.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Spira, A., Edmiston, K.H. (2012). Clinical Trial Design in the Age of Molecular Profiling. In: Espina, V., Liotta, L. (eds) Molecular Profiling. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 823. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-216-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-216-2_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press
Print ISBN: 978-1-60327-215-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-60327-216-2
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols