Recent status of Phase I clinical trials for brain tumors: a regulatory science study of exploratory efficacy endpoints

Author:

Watanabe Shinya1ORCID,Nonaka Takahiro2,Maeda Makoto3,Yamada Masanobu1,Sugii Narushi4,Hashimoto Koichi1,Takano Shingo1,Koyanagi Tomoyoshi1,Arakawa Yoshihiro1,Ishikawa Eiichi1

Affiliation:

1. University of Tsukuba: Tsukuba Daigaku

2. Osaka Metropolitan University: Osaka Koritsu Daigaku

3. National Cancer Center Hospital: Kokuritsu Gan Kenkyu Center Chuo Byoin

4. University of Tsukuba Hospital: Tsukuba Daigaku Fuzoku Byoin

Abstract

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 CortellisTM, 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 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.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

Reference12 articles.

1. Guidelines for clinical evaluation of anti-cancer drugs;Minami H;Cancer Sci,2021

2. RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment;Therasse P;Eur J Cancer,2006

3. Fact-finding research on efficacy endpoints in recent Phase II clinical trials targeting glioblastoma;Watanabe S;Pharm Dev Regul Sci,2021

4. Efficacy endpoints in phase II clinical trials for meningioma: an analysis of recent clinical trials;Watanabe S;Ther Innov Regul Sci,2023

5. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group;Wen PY;J Clin Oncol,2010

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3