Regulatory considerations on endpoints in ovarian cancer drug development.

Ovarian cancer remains a disease entity that is responsible for considerable morbidity and mortality among women worldwide. Modern drug research pipelines and accelerated drug development timelines applied to other disease entities have begun to make an impact on treatment options for patients with advanced ovarian cancer, as exemplified by the recent accelerated approval of 2 agents for this disease as the forerunners of a growing number of registrational trials. Regulatory flexibility for this serious and life-threatening condition spurs the consideration of intermediate endpoints for regulatory trial design, including potential applications in the development of newer therapeutic classes such as targeted therapies and immunotherapies for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Cancer 2017;123:2604-8. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma After Anti-Angiogenic Therapy and Exploratory Predictive Biomarker Analysis.

On November 23, 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved nivolumab (OPDIVO, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company) for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who have received prior anti-angiogenic therapy. The approval was based on efficacy and safety data demonstrated in an open-label, randomized study of 821 patients with advanced RCC who progressed after at least one anti-angiogenic therapy. Patients were randomized to nivolumab or everolimus and followed for disease progression. The primary end point was overall survival. Subsequent therapies, including everolimus for patients who developed progressive disease on the nivolumab arm, were allowed, but no cross-over was permitted. The median overall survival was 25.0 months on the nivolumab arm and 19.6 months on everolimus arm (hazard ratio: 0.73; 95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.89). The confirmed response rates were 21.5% versus 3.9%; median durations of response were 23.0 versus 13.7 months, and median times to response were 3.0 versus 3.7 months in the nivolumab and everolimus arms, respectively. A statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival was not observed in this trial. The safety profile of nivolumab in renal cell cancer was similar to that in other disease settings. However, the incidence of immune-mediated nephritis appeared to be higher in patients with RCC. The Oncologist 2017;22:311-317 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The overall benefit/risk profile demonstrated in trial CA209025 supported the approval of nivolumab as an additional treatment option for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma after anti-angiogenic therapy. The use of nivolumab in patients who had received vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy resulted in a 5.4 month improvement in median overall survival compared with the everolimus arm. This difference is statistically significant and clinically meaningful.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab for the Treatment of Patients with Progressive Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma after Platinum-Containing Chemotherapy.

Until recently in the United States, no products were approved for second-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. On May 18, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved atezolizumab for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma whose disease progressed during or following platinum-containing chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment with platinum-containing chemotherapy. Atezolizumab is a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) blocking antibody and represents the first approved product directed against PD-L1. This accelerated approval was based on results of a single-arm trial in 310 patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had disease progression after prior platinum-containing chemotherapy. Patients received atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Key efficacy measures were objective response rate (ORR), as assessed by Independent Review per RECIST 1.1, and duration of response (DoR). With a median follow-up of 14.4 months, confirmed ORR was 14.8% (95% CI: 11.1, 19.3) in all treated patients. Median DoR was not reached and response durations ranged from 2.1+ to 13.8+ months. Of the 46 responders, 37 patients had an ongoing response for ≥ 6 months. The most common adverse reactions (≥20%) were fatigue, decreased appetite, nausea, urinary tract infection, pyrexia, and constipation. Infection and immune-related adverse events also occurred, including pneumonitis, hepatitis, colitis, endocrine disorders, and rashes. Overall, the benefit-risk assessment was favorable to support accelerated approval. The observed clinical benefits need to be verified in confirmatory trial(s). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This accelerated approval of atezolizumab for second-line use in advanced urothelial carcinoma provides patients with an effective, novel treatment option for the management of their disease. This represents the first immunotherapy approved in this disease setting.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approval Summary: Enzalutamide for the Treatment of Patients With Chemotherapy-Naïve Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved enzalutamide for the treatment of patients with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). At the prespecified interim analysis, a statistically significant improvement in overall survival was demonstrated for patients in the enzalutamide arm compared with patients in the placebo arm. The overall benefit-risk profile supports the expanded indication for enzalutamide. On September 10, 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved enzalutamide for the treatment of patients with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Enzalutamide was initially approved in 2012 for use in patients with mCRPC who had previously received docetaxel. The current approval was based on the results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial conducted in 1,717 asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. Patients were assigned to receive either enzalutamide 160 mg or placebo orally once daily. The coprimary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), which was assessed by independent central radiology review. At the prespecified interim analysis, a statistically significant improvement in OS was demonstrated for patients in the enzalutamide arm compared with patients in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.84). The median OS was 32.4 and 30.2 months in the enzalutamide and placebo arms, respectively. A statistically significant prolongation of rPFS was observed in patients in the enzalutamide arm (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.14-0.21). In addition, the time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy was prolonged in the enzalutamide arm (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.30-0.40), with median times of 28.0 and 10.8 months in the enzalutamide and placebo arms, respectively. The safety profile was similar to that previously reported for enzalutamide. Adverse reactions of interest included seizure, hypertension, and falls. Enzalutamide should be discontinued if a seizure occurs during treatment. The overall benefit-risk profile supports the expanded indication for enzalutamide.

Landscape of cancer clinical trials in India - a comprehensive analysis of the Clinical Trial Registry-India.

Background: Cancer is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in India. Clinical trials are critical for driving innovation in cancer therapy, diagnosis, and prevention. This study aims to depict the evolving landscape of cancer clinical trials in India by analysing the clinical trials registered in Clinical Trial Registry-India (CTRI). Methods: We identified cancer trials registered in CTRI (between 2007 and 2021) using search terms adapted from the cancer types defined by the National Cancer Institute (USA). We then collated and analysed the publicly available information from CTRI (cancer subtypes, type of trial, treatment intent, type of intervention, sponsor type, recruitment countries) and used descriptive statistics to illustrate the overall as well as year-to-year trend. Findings: In total, we identified 1988 cancer trials, the majority of which focused on treating cancer (63%) and rest of the trials aimed at optimising the operational aspects of surgery (19%), mitigating treatment-related toxicity (10.6%), or treating cancer-related symptoms (7.8%). Focusing on trials with the intent of treating cancer, we found that most were investigating solid tumours as opposed to haematological malignancies with the most prominent cancer subtypes being breast cancer (17%), head and neck cancer (9.8%), lung cancer (9.6%), and cervical cancer (6.6%). The number of trials conducted in a given cancer subtype from our analysis overall correlated to the incidence, mortality, and 5-year prevalence of the respective cancer subtype in India; however, head and neck cancer and cervical cancer were underrepresented in trials as compared with the disease burden. The most common type of intervention was investigational drugs. The most common sponsor types were global pharmaceutical industry (26%) and research institution and hospital (26%). Despite a relatively high cancer burden, the availability of cancer trials in the Northeastern states of India was limited. Interpretation: There is a pressing need for clinical cancer research in India to be better aligned with the nation's healthcare needs and disease burden, focusing on prevalent and deadly cancers while ensuring the availability of clinical trials across geographic regions and underserved populations. Funding: Pi Health USA, a fully owned subsidiary of BeiGene Ltd.

Remote Monitoring and Data Collection for Decentralized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Less than 5% of patients with cancer enroll in a clinical trial, partly due to financial and logistic burdens, especially among underserved populations. The COVID-19 pandemic marked a substantial shift in the adoption of decentralized trial operations by pharmaceutical companies. Objective: To assess the current global state of adoption of decentralized trial technologies, understand factors that may be driving or preventing adoption, and highlight aspirations and direction for industry to enable more patient-centric trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Bloomberg New Economy International Cancer Coalition, composed of patient advocacy, industry, government regulator, and academic medical center representatives, developed a survey directed to global biopharmaceutical companies of the coalition from October 1 through December 31, 2022, with a focus on registrational clinical trials. The data for this survey study were analyzed between January 1 and 31, 2023. Exposure: Adoption of decentralized clinical trial technologies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The survey measured (1) outcomes of different remote monitoring and data collection technologies on patient centricity, (2) adoption of these technologies in oncology and all therapeutic areas, and (3) barriers and facilitators to adoption using descriptive statistics. Results: All 8 invited coalition companies completed the survey, representing 33% of the oncology market by revenues in 2021. Across nearly all technologies, adoption in oncology trials lags that of all trials. In the current state, electronic diaries and electronic clinical outcome assessments are the most used technology, with a mean (SD) of 56% (19%) and 51% (29%) adoption for all trials and oncology trials, respectively, whereas visits within local physician networks is the least adopted at a mean (SD) of 12% (18%) and 7% (9%), respectively. Looking forward, the difference between the current and aspired adoption rate in 5 years for oncology is large, with respondents expecting a 40% or greater absolute adoption increase in 8 of the 11 technologies surveyed. Furthermore, digitally enabled recruitment, local imaging capabilities, and local physician networks were identified as technologies that could be most effective for improving patient centricity in the long term. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings may help to galvanize momentum toward greater adoption of enabling technologies to support a new paradigm of trials that are more accessible, less burdensome, and more inclusive.

L-asparaginase inhibits invasive and angiogenic activity and induces autophagy in ovarian cancer.

Recent work identified L-asparaginase (L-ASP) as a putative therapeutic target for ovarian cancer. We suggest that L-ASP, a dysregulator of glycosylation, would interrupt the local microenvironment, affecting the ovarian cancer cell-endothelial cell interaction and thus angiogenesis without cytotoxic effects. Ovarian cancer cell lines and human microvascular endothelial cells (HMVEC) were exposed to L-ASP at physiologically attainable concentrations and subjected to analyses of endothelial tube formation, invasion, adhesion and the assessment of sialylated proteins involved in matrix-associated and heterotypic cell adhesion. Marked reduction in HMVEC tube formation in vitro, HMVEC and ovarian cancer cell invasion, and heterotypic cell-cell and cell-matrix adhesion was observed (P < 0.05-0.0001). These effects were associated with reduced binding to ß1integrin, activation of FAK, and cell surface sialyl Lewis(X) (sLe(x)) expression. No reduction in HMVEC E-selectin expression was seen consistent with the unidirectional inhibitory actions observed. L-ASP concentrations were non-toxic to either ovarian cancer or HMVEC lines in the time frame of the assays. However, early changes of autophagy were observed in both cell types with induction of ATG12, beclin-1, and cleavage of LC-3, indicating cell injury did occur. These data and the known mechanism of action of L-ASP on glycosylation of nascent proteins suggest that L-ASP reduces of ovarian cancer dissemination and progression through modification of its microenvironment. The reduction of ovarian cancer cell surface sLe(x) inhibits interaction with HMVEC and thus HMVEC differentiation into tubes, inhibits interaction with the local matrix reducing invasive behaviour, and causes cell injury initiating autophagy in tumour and vascular cells.

Adhesion molecule protein signature in ovarian cancer effusions is prognostic of patient outcome.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer cells in malignant effusions lack attachment to solid-phase matrix substrata and receive survival stimuli through cell-cell and cell-soluble matrix molecule interactions. We hypothesized that adhesion-related survival and proliferation pathway signals can inform clinical outcomes and guide targeted therapeutics. METHODS: Lysed cell pellets from a blinded set of benign (n = 20) and malignant (n = 51) peritoneal and pleural ovarian cancer patient effusions were applied to reverse-phase protein arrays and examined using validated antibodies to adhesion-associated protein endpoints. Results were subjected to hierarchical clustering for signature development. Association between specimen type, protein expression, and clinicopathologic associations were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Survival outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank comparison. RESULTS: A cell adhesion protein signature obtained from unsupervised clustering distinguished malignant from benign effusions (P = 6.18E-06). Protein subset analyses from malignant cases defined 3 cell adhesion protein clusters driven by E-cadherin, epithelial cell adhesion molecule, and N-cadherin, respectively. The components of the E- and N-cadherin clusters correlated with clinical outcome by Kaplan-Meier statistics. Univariate analysis indicated that FAK and phosphorylated AKT were associated with higher overall and progression-free survival (PFS) (P = .03), and Akt, phosphorylated paxillin, and E- and N-cadherin were associated with improved PFS (P ≤ .05). If 4 or 5 of the index adhesion proteins were high, PFS was improved by multivariate analysis (P ≤ .01). CONCLUSIONS: This hypothesis-testing examination of tumor cell adhesion molecules and pathways yielded potential predictive biomarkers with which to triage patients to selected molecular therapeutics and may serve as a platform for biomarker-based stratification for clinical application.

Decoding kinase-adverse event associations for small molecule kinase inhibitors.

Small molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) are being approved at a fast pace under expedited programs for anticancer treatment. In this study, we construct a multi-domain dataset from a total of 4638 patients in the registrational trials of 16 FDA-approved SMKIs and employ a machine-learning model to examine the relationships between kinase targets and adverse events (AEs). Internal and external (datasets from two independent SMKIs) validations have been conducted to verify the usefulness of the established model. We systematically evaluate the potential associations between 442 kinases with 2145 AEs and made publicly accessible an interactive web application "Identification of Kinase-Specific Signal" ( https://gongj.shinyapps.io/ml4ki ). The developed model (1) provides a platform for experimentalists to identify and verify undiscovered KI-AE pairs, (2) serves as a precision-medicine tool to mitigate individual patient safety risks by forecasting clinical safety signals and (3) can function as a modern drug development tool to screen and compare SMKI target therapies from the safety perspective.

Dose dependence of treatment-related adverse events for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies: a model-based meta-analysis.

Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and/or cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatments are associated with adverse events (AEs), which may be dependent on ICI dose. Applying a model-based meta-analysis to evaluate safety data from published clinical trials from 2005 to 2018, we analyzed the dose/exposure dependence of ICI treatment-related AE (trAE) and immune-mediated AE (imAE) rates. Unlike with PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy, CTLA-4 inhibitor monotherapy exhibited a dose/exposure dependence on most AE types evaluated. Furthermore, combination therapy with PD-1 inhibitor significantly strengthened the dependence of trAE and imAE rates on CTLA-4 inhibitor dose/exposure.

Proteomic profiling in ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the role of proteomic profiling in the diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer. METHODS: We report a thorough review of the literature, ongoing trials, and our group's experience with proteomic profiling for early detection, recurrence, and treatment of ovarian cancer. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian cancer remains the deadliest gynecologic malignancy in the western world and is most often diagnosed at a rarely curable late stage. Novel applications of proteomic techniques, such as mass spectrometry, show promise in the quest for reliable multimodality screening programs for the early detection of ovarian cancer. Proteomic analysis of tissue samples has underscored the heterogeneity of this disease process. Development of validated assays that survey the genetic and/or proteomic makeup of an individual tumor will add greatly to the histological classification of the tumor and may lead to different treatment approaches tailored to the unique expression pattern of each individual patient. As novel agents that disrupt signal propagation develop, proteomic profiling by reverse-phase protein arrays can characterize the in-tumor efficacy of the agent by quantification of the changes in expression levels of activated proteins. Together, better understanding of the potential diagnostic and therapeutic targets followed with proof-of-target effect will lead to rational combinations of novel therapy and improve individual ovarian cancer patient outcome.

US Food and Drug Administration Pooled Analysis to Assess the Impact of Bone-Only Metastatic Breast Cancer on Clinical Trial Outcomes and Radiographic Assessments.

Purpose The outcome and proportion of patients with bone-only (BO) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has not been well described. We sought to describe the differential outcomes of patients with BO MBC in clinical trials and explore whether there was a discrepancy in radiographic reads between investigator and blinded independent central review. Methods We pooled and analyzed data on 10,521 patients from 13 prospective trials submitted for MBC treatment in initial or supplemental New Drug or Biologics License Applications from 2005. Three subsets were evaluated: BO, bone with other metastases (BWO), and no bone metastases (NBM). Early discordance rate and late discordance rate were calculated from 3,733 and 2,813 patients subject to a blinded independent central review, respectively. Results Bone metastases were identified in 49% (range: 42% to 73%) of patients across trials. BO disease was present in 12.5% (range: 4% to 26%), dependent on subtype. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the pooled trials demonstrated improved outcomes for the BO subgroup compared with other subgroups (BO v BWO PFS hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.591 to 0.696; BO v NBM PFS HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.76; BO v BWO OS HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.61; BO v NBM OS HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.76). The BO subgroup has a higher early discordance rate and lower late discordance rate than the BWO and NBM subgroups. Conclusion To our knowledge, this review is the largest analysis to date of the BO subgroup of MBC and suggests this subgroup may have a distinct natural history. There also seems to be a difference in how the local investigators assessed progression events in the BO subgroup when compared with the other two groups.

An FDA Perspective on the Regulatory Implications of Complex Signatures to Predict Response to Targeted Therapies.

As technologies evolve, and diagnostics move from detection of single biomarkers toward complex signatures, an increase in the clinical use and regulatory submission of complex signatures is anticipated. However, to date, no complex signatures have been approved as companion diagnostics. In this article, we will describe the potential benefit of complex signatures and their unique regulatory challenges, including analytic performance validation, complex signature simulation, and clinical performance evaluation. We also will review the potential regulatory pathways for clearance, approval, or acceptance of complex signatures by the FDA. These regulatory pathways include regulations applicable to in vitro diagnostic devices, including companion diagnostic devices, the potential for labeling as a complementary diagnostic, and the biomarker qualification program. Clin Cancer Res; 23(6); 1368-72. ©2016 AACR.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approval Summary: Atezolizumab for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

On October 18, 2016, the FDA approved atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ; Genentech, Inc.) for treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) whose disease progressed during or following platinum-containing chemotherapy. Approval was based on demonstration of clinically meaningful improvements in overall survival (OS) and an acceptable safety profile in two randomized clinical trials (OAK and POPLAR). Median OS in OAK, a phase III trial, was 13.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.8-15.7] in the atezolizumab arm compared with 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.6-11.2) in the docetaxel arm [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.87; P = 0.0004]. Median OS in POPLAR, a phase II trial, was 12.6 months (95% CI, 9.7-16.0) and 9.7 months (95% CI, 8.6-12.0; HR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.92) for the atezolizumab and docetaxel arms, respectively. In patients treated with atezolizumab, the most common (≥20%) adverse reactions were fatigue, decreased appetite, dyspnea, cough, nausea, musculoskeletal pain, and constipation; the most common (≥2%) grade 3 to 4 adverse events were dyspnea, pneumonia, hypoxia, hyponatremia, fatigue, anemia, musculoskeletal pain, aspartate aminotransferase increase, alanine aminotransferase increase, dysphagia, and arthralgia. Clinically significant immune-related adverse events for patients receiving atezolizumab included 1.4% incidence each of grade 3 to 4 pneumonitis, hepatitis, colitis, and thyroid disease. Clin Cancer Res; 23(16); 4534-9. ©2017 AACR.

FDA Approval Summary: Rucaparib for the Treatment of Patients with Deleterious BRCA Mutation-Associated Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

On December 19, 2016, the FDA granted accelerated approval to rucaparib (RUBRACA; Clovis Oncology, Inc.) for the treatment of patients with deleterious BRCA mutation (germline and/or somatic)-associated advanced ovarian cancer who have been treated with two or more chemotherapies. The FDA also approved the FoundationFocus CDx BRCA test (Foundation Medicine, Inc.), the first next-generation sequencing-based companion diagnostic, for identifying patients with advanced ovarian cancer eligible for treatment with rucaparib based on detection of deleterious BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations in tumor tissue. Rucaparib's approval was based primarily on efficacy data from 106 patients with BRCA mutation-associated ovarian cancer who had prior treatment with two or more chemotherapies and safety data from 377 patients with ovarian cancer treated with rucaparib 600 mg orally twice daily on two open-label, single-arm trials. Investigator-assessed objective response rate was 54% [57/106; 95% confidence interval (CI), 44-64], and median duration of response was 9.2 months (95% CI, 6.6-11.7). The approved companion diagnostic verified tumor BRCA mutation status retrospectively in 96% (64/67) of patients. Common adverse reactions (≥20%) to rucaparib were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, anemia, abdominal pain, dysgeusia, constipation, decreased appetite, diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, and dyspnea. This article summarizes the FDA review and data supporting rucaparib's accelerated approval. Clin Cancer Res; 23(23); 7165-70. ©2017 AACRSee related commentary by Kohn et al., p. 7155.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approval: Cabozantinib for the Treatment of Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

On April 25, 2016, the FDA approved cabozantinib (Cabometyx; Exelixis, Inc.) for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in patients who have received prior antiangiogenic therapy. The approval was based on data from one randomized, open-label, multicenter study in which patients with RCC who had received prior antiangiogenic therapy were treated with either cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily (n = 330) or everolimus 10 mg orally once daily (n = 328). The major efficacy outcome measure was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by a blinded independent radiology review committee in the first 375 randomized patients. A statistically significant improvement in PFS was seen, with a median PFS of 7.4 and 3.8 months in the cabozantinib and everolimus arms, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45-0.74; P < 0.0001]. At a second interim analysis, a statistically significant improvement in overall survival (OS) in the intent-to-treat population was also demonstrated, with a median OS of 21.4 and 16.5 months in the cabozantinib and everolimus arms, respectively (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.83; P = 0.0003). The most common (greater than or equal to 25%) adverse reactions included diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, hypertension, vomiting, weight loss, and constipation. Clin Cancer Res; 23(2); 330-5. ©2016 AACR.

Dose Finding of Small-Molecule Oncology Drugs: Optimization throughout the Development Life Cycle.

In the current era of rapid marketing approval for promising new products in oncology, dose finding and optimization for small-molecule oncology drugs occurs throughout the development cycle and into the postmarketing setting. Many trials that support a regulatory application have high rates of dose reductions and discontinuations, which may result in postmarketing requirements (PMR) to study alternate doses or dosing schedules. Kinase inhibitors particularly have been susceptible to this problem, and among the 31 approved drugs of this class, the approvals of eight have included such PMRs and/or commitments. Thus, the current paradigm for dose finding and optimization could be improved. Newer strategies for dose finding rather than traditional 3 + 3 designs should be considered where feasible, and dose optimization should be continued after phase I and throughout development. Such strategies will increase the likelihood of a right dose for the right drug at the time of regulatory approval. Clin Cancer Res; 22(11); 2613-7. ©2016 AACR SEE ALL ARTICLES IN THIS CCR FOCUS SECTION, "NEW APPROACHES FOR OPTIMIZING DOSING OF ANTICANCER AGENTS".

21st Century Cardio-Oncology: Identifying Cardiac Safety Signals in the Era of Personalized Medicine.

Cardiotoxicity is a well-established complication of oncology therapies. Cardiomyopathy resulting from anthracyclines is a classic example. In the past decade, an explosion of novel cancer therapies, often targeted and more specific than traditional therapies, has revolutionized oncology therapy and dramatically changed cancer prognosis. However, some of these therapies have introduced an assortment of cardiovascular (CV) complications. At times, these devastating outcomes have only become apparent after drug approval and have limited the use of potent therapies. There is a growing need for better testing platforms, both for CV toxicity screening, as well as for elucidating mechanisms of cardiotoxicities of approved cancer therapies. This review discusses the utility of nonclinical models (in vitro, in vivo, & in silico) available and highlights recent advancements in modalities like human stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes for developing more comprehensive cardiotoxicity testing and new means of cardioprotection with targeted anticancer therapies.