Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 26(2): 366-371, 2019 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30542840

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Oncotype DX® assay has been validated in predicting response to adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Its role in neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) has not been established. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify all patients with T1-T3, ER-positive, HER2-negative primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 who had Oncotype DX recurrence scores (RS) and received NCT. RS were classified as low, intermediate, or high. Unadjusted and adjusted regression analyses were performed to determine the association between pathologic complete response (pCR) and RS. RESULTS: A total of 989 patients (mean age, 54.6 years) with available RS who underwent NCT were identified. RS were low in 227 (23.0%) patients, intermediate in 450 (45.5%) patients, and high in 312 (31.5%) patients. Most patients had a T1 (431 [43.6%]) or T2 tumor (451 [45.6%]). Most had N0 disease (757 [76.5%]). Tumor grades were 1 (123 [12.4%]), 2 (517 [52.3%]), or 3 (349 [35.3%]). pCR was achieved by 42 (4.3%) patients. Adjusted multivariable analysis showed a significant association between pCR and high RS (odds ratio 4.87; 95% confidence interval 2.01-11.82). CONCLUSIONS: High Oncotype DX RS was associated with pCR after NCT in this national cohort of ER-positive, HER2-negative patients. Oncotype DX testing could help to identify patients most suited for NCT and should be considered for incorporation into the multidisciplinary decision-making process.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Biomarcadores Tumorais/genética , Neoplasias da Mama/terapia , Quimioterapia Adjuvante/mortalidade , Perfilação da Expressão Gênica , Terapia Neoadjuvante/mortalidade , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/genética , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de Sobrevida , Adulto Jovem
2.
BMC Med ; 16(1): 45, 2018 03 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29562926

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often approves new drugs based on trials that use surrogate markers for endpoints, which involve certain trade-offs and may risk making erroneous inferences about the medical product's actual clinical effect. This study aims to compare the treatment effects among pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on surrogate markers of disease with those observed among postapproval trials for the same indication. METHODS: We searched Drugs@FDA and PubMed to identify published randomized superiority design pivotal trials for all novel drugs initially approved by the FDA between 2005 and 2012 based on surrogate markers as primary endpoints and published postapproval trials using the same surrogate markers or patient-relevant outcomes as endpoints. Summary ratio of odds ratios (RORs) and difference between standardized mean differences (dSMDs) were used to quantify the average difference in treatment effects between pivotal and matched postapproval trials. RESULTS: Between 2005 and 2012, the FDA approved 88 novel drugs for 90 indications based on one or multiple pivotal trials using surrogate markers of disease. Of these, 27 novel drugs for 27 indications were approved based on pivotal trials using surrogate markers as primary endpoints that could be matched to at least one postapproval trial, for a total of 43 matches. For nine (75.0%) of the 12 matches using the same non-continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than postapproval trials. On average, treatment effects were 50% higher (more beneficial) in the pivotal than the postapproval trials (ROR 1.5; 95% confidence interval CI 1.01-2.23). For 17 (54.8%) of the 31 matches using the same continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than the postapproval trials. On average, there was no difference in treatment effects between pivotal and postapproval trials (dSMDs 0.01; 95% CI -0.15-0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Many postapproval drug trials are not directly comparable to previously published pivotal trials, particularly with respect to endpoint selection. Although treatment effects from pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on non-continuous surrogate markers of disease are often larger than those observed among postapproval trials using surrogate markers as trial endpoints, there is no evidence of difference between pivotal and postapproval trials using continuous surrogate markers.


Assuntos
Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Aprovação de Drogas/métodos , Estudos Epidemiológicos , United States Food and Drug Administration/normas , Humanos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos
3.
JAMA ; 317(18): 1854-1863, 2017 May 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28492899

RESUMO

IMPORTANCE: Postmarket safety events of novel pharmaceuticals and biologics occur when new safety risks are identified after initial regulatory approval of these therapeutics. These safety events can change how novel therapeutics are used in clinical practice and inform patient and clinician decision making. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the frequency of postmarket safety events among novel therapeutics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and to examine whether any novel therapeutic characteristics known at the time of FDA approval were associated with increased risk. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cohort study of all novel therapeutics approved by the FDA between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2010, followed up through February 28, 2017. EXPOSURES: Novel therapeutic characteristics known at the time of FDA approval, including drug class, therapeutic area, priority review, accelerated approval, orphan status, near-regulatory deadline approval, and regulatory review time. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: A composite of (1) withdrawals due to safety concerns, (2) FDA issuance of incremental boxed warnings added in the postmarket period, and (3) FDA issuance of safety communications. RESULTS: From 2001 through 2010, the FDA approved 222 novel therapeutics (183 pharmaceuticals and 39 biologics). There were 123 new postmarket safety events (3 withdrawals, 61 boxed warnings, and 59 safety communications) during a median follow-up period of 11.7 years (interquartile range [IQR], 8.7-13.8 years), affecting 71 (32.0%) of the novel therapeutics. The median time from approval to first postmarket safety event was 4.2 years (IQR, 2.5-6.0 years), and the proportion of novel therapeutics affected by a postmarket safety event at 10 years was 30.8% (95% CI, 25.1%-37.5%). In multivariable analysis, postmarket safety events were statistically significantly more frequent among biologics (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.93; 95% CI, 1.06-3.52; P = .03), therapeutics indicated for the treatment of psychiatric disease (IRR = 3.78; 95% CI, 1.77-8.06; P < .001), those receiving accelerated approval (IRR = 2.20; 95% CI, 1.15-4.21; P = .02), and those with near-regulatory deadline approval (IRR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.19-3.05; P = .008); events were statistically significantly less frequent among those with regulatory review times less than 200 days (IRR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24-0.87; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among 222 novel therapeutics approved by the FDA from 2001 through 2010, 32% were affected by a postmarket safety event. Biologics, psychiatric therapeutics, and accelerated and near-regulatory deadline approval were statistically significantly associated with higher rates of events, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of the safety of novel therapeutics throughout their life cycle.


Assuntos
Produtos Biológicos/efeitos adversos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Vigilância de Produtos Comercializados , Segurança , Estudos de Coortes , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Risco , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
5.
BMJ ; 357: j1680, 2017 May 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28468750

RESUMO

Objective To characterize the prospective controlled clinical studies for all novel drugs that were initially approved by the Food and Drug Administration on the basis of limited evidence.Design Systematic review.Data sources Drugs@FDA database and PubMed.Study inclusion All prospective controlled clinical studies published after approval for all novel drugs initially approved by the FDA between 2005 and 2012 on the basis of a single pivotal trial, pivotal trials that used surrogate markers of disease as primary endpoints, or both. Results Between 2005 and 2012 the FDA approved 117 novel drugs for 123 indications on the basis of a single pivotal trial, pivotal trials that used surrogate markers of disease, or both (single surrogate trials). We identified 758 published controlled studies over a median of 5.5 years (interquartile range 3.4-8.2) after approval, most of which (554 of 758; 73.1%) were studies for indications approved on the basis of surrogate markers of disease. Most postapproval studies used active comparators-67 of 77 (87.0%) indications approved on the basis of single pivotal trials, 365 of 554 (65.9%) approvals based on surrogate marker trials, and 100 of 127 (78.7%) approvals based on single surrogate trials-and examined surrogate markers of efficacy as primary endpoints-51 of 77 (66.2%), 512 of 554 (92.4%), and 110 of 127 (86.6%), respectively. Overall, no postapproval studies were identified for 43 of the 123 (35.0%) approved indications. The median total number of postapproval studies identified was 1 (interquartile range 0-2) for indications approved on the basis of a single pivotal trial, 3 (1-8) for indications approved on the basis of pivotal trials that used surrogate markers of disease as primary endpoints, and 1 (0-2) for single surrogate trial approvals, and the median aggregate number of patients enrolled in postapproval studies was 90 (0-509), 533 (122-3633), and 38 (0-666), respectively. The proportion of approved indications with one or more randomized, controlled, double blind study using a clinical outcome for the primary endpoint that was published after approval and showed superior efficacy was 18.2% (6 of 33), 2.0% (1 of 49), and 4.9% (2 of 41), respectively.Conclusions The quantity and quality of postapproval clinical evidence varied substantially for novel drugs first approved by the FDA on the basis of limited evidence, with few controlled studies published after approval that confirmed efficacy using clinical outcomes for the original FDA approved indication.


Assuntos
Ensaios Clínicos Controlados como Assunto , Aprovação de Drogas , Vigilância de Produtos Comercializados , United States Food and Drug Administration , Humanos , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA