Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Recent Status of Phase I Clinical Trials for Brain Tumors: A Regulatory Science Study of Exploratory Efficacy Endpoints.
Watanabe, Shinya; Nonaka, Takahiro; Maeda, Makoto; Yamada, Masanobu; Sugii, Narushi; Hashimoto, Koichi; Takano, Shingo; Koyanagi, Tomoyoshi; Arakawa, Yoshihiro; Ishikawa, Eiichi.
Afiliación
  • Watanabe S; Department of Neurosurgery, Mito Kyodo General Hospital, Tsukuba University Hospital Mito Area Medical Education Center, 3-2-7 Miyamachi, Mito, 310-0015, Ibaraki, Japan. shinya-watanabey@md.tsukuba.ac.jp.
  • Nonaka T; Department of Neurosurgery, Institute of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan. shinya-watanabey@md.tsukuba.ac.jp.
  • Maeda M; Department of Health and Medical Innovation, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka Metropolitan University School, Osaka, Japan.
  • Yamada M; Department of, Pharmacy, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Sugii N; Tsukuba Clinical Research and Development Organization, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
  • Hashimoto K; Department of Neurosurgery, University of Tsukuba Hospital, Tsukuba, Japan.
  • Takano S; Tsukuba Clinical Research and Development Organization, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
  • Koyanagi T; Department of Neurosurgery, University of Tsukuba Hospital, Tsukuba, Japan.
  • Arakawa Y; Tsukuba Clinical Research and Development Organization, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
  • Ishikawa E; Tsukuba Clinical Research and Development Organization, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
Ther Innov Regul Sci ; 58(4): 655-662, 2024 Jul.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38530629
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Appropriate exploratory efficacy data from Phase I trials are vital for subsequent phases. Owing to the uniqueness of brain tumors (BTs), use of different strategies to evaluate efficacy is warranted. We studied exploratory efficacy evaluation in Phase I trials involving BTs.

METHODS:

Using Clarivate's Cortellis™, 42 Phase I trials of BT interventions conducted from 2020 to 2022 were analyzed for efficacy endpoints, which were set as primary endpoints (PEs) or secondary endpoints (SEs). Additionally, these metrics were compared in two subgroups trials including only BTs (Group-A) and those including BTs among mixed solid tumors (Group-B).

RESULTS:

Selected studies included a median of 1.5 PEs (range, 1-6) and 5 SEs (range, 0-19). Efficacy endpoints were included as PEs and SEs in 2 (5%) and 31 (78%) trials, respectively. Among the latter 31 trials that included 94 efficacy endpoints, 24, 22, 20, 9, and 8 reflected overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR), and disease control rate (DCR), respectively. ORR for BT was determined using various methods; however, the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) was used less frequently in Group-A than in Group-B (p = 0.0039).

CONCLUSIONS:

Recent Phase I trials included efficacy endpoints as SEs, with ORR, PFS, or OS included in ~ 50% trials and DOR or DCR in ~ 25%. No established criteria exist for imaging evaluation of BTs. Phase I trials involving mixed solid tumor cohorts revealed challenges in designing methods to assess the exploratory efficacy of BTs.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Encefálicas / Ensayos Clínicos Fase I como Asunto / Determinación de Punto Final Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Ther Innov Regul Sci Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Japón

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias Encefálicas / Ensayos Clínicos Fase I como Asunto / Determinación de Punto Final Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Ther Innov Regul Sci Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Japón