Systematic review of clinical drug development activities for neuroblastoma from 2011 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the landscape of clinical trials for patients with neuroblastoma may inform efforts to improve drug development. PROCEDURE: We evaluated therapeutic trials for patients with neuroblastoma from 2011 to 2020 in our search using clinical trial information from ClinicalTrials.gov, Clinicaltrialregister.eu, PubMed, and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting collection. Trends in trials and treatments over time were evaluated qualitatively. RESULTS: A total of 192 trials met inclusion criteria. A median of 20.5 trials were started per year, which was stable over time. There were 87 (45%) phase 1, 100 (51%) phase 2, and only five (2.6%) phase 3 trials. The median time to completion was 4.9 years for phase 1 and 2 trials (no phase 3 trials reported as completed during the study period). In all, 34% of trials were international, while 20% of trials were intercontinental. Eighty-nine percent of nonmyeloablative trials included at least one novel agent. 48% of these trials studied combination therapies, and 86% of these combinations included conventional chemotherapy. Among 157 trials that included a targeted agent, 78 targets were identified, with GD2 being the primary target under investigation in 16.7% of these trials. Only eight trials were included in regulatory decisions, which led to European Medicines Agency (EMA) or Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for neuroblastoma. CONCLUSIONS: The large number of trials initiated per year, the range of targets, and the rate of intercontinental collaboration are encouraging. The paucity of late-stage trials, the prolonged trial duration, and relative lack of combination studies are major causes of concern. This work will inform future drug development for neuroblastoma.

Landscape of phase 1 clinical trials for minors with cancer in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Understanding trends in characteristics of early phase trials that allow minors with cancer to participate may inform additional efforts to improve cancer drug development for young people. METHODS: We accessed data for oncology phase 1 or phase 1/2 trials in the United States from ClinicalTrials.gov with lower age bound for eligibility <18 years. Descriptive statistics were calculated and trends over time evaluated using logistic and multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Six hundred twelve trials met inclusion criteria. Sixty-five percent of trials were for older adults that also allowed minors, while 9% were exclusively for patients ≤18 years of age. Eighty-three percent of trials included at least one novel agent, while 17% studied only conventional therapies. Fifty-eight percent of trials studied treatments not yet Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved (48% if exclusively for patients ≤18 years). Fifteen percent of trials for which dose-escalation method could be determined, utilized a model-based design. Eighteen percent of all trials were industry sponsored (48% if exclusively for patients ≤18 years). Forty-nine percent of all trials were multicenter (69% if exclusively for patients ≤18 years). There was an increase in trials exclusively focused on patients with central nervous system (CNS) tumors over the study period (P ≤ .02). No other temporal trends were seen. The median times from first-in-adult to first-in-pediatric for monotherapy and combination trials were 5.7 and 3.3 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: The paucity of clear temporal trends highlights the need for innovation in early drug development for young people. Our analysis serves as a benchmark against which to evaluate initiatives to improve pediatric cancer drug development.