Adaptive designs for single-arm phase II trials in oncology

2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Englert ◽  
Meinhard Kieser
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Adaptive Designs ◽  
Phase Ii Trials

Adaptive designs for dose-finding in non-cancer phase II trials: influence of early unexpected outcomes

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 595-606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthieu Resche-Rigon ◽  
Sarah Zohar ◽  
Sylvie Chevret
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Adaptive Designs ◽  
Dose Finding ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Unexpected Outcomes

scholarly journals Advantages of multi-arm non-randomised sequentially allocated cohort designs for Phase II oncology trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Mossop ◽  
Michael J. Grayling ◽  
Ferdia A. Gallagher ◽  
Sarah J. Welsh ◽  
Grant D. Stewart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Adaptive Designs ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Cancer Treatments ◽  
Interim Analyses ◽  
Multiple Treatment ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
Master Design ◽  
Patient Responses ◽  
New Treatment

Abstract Background Efficient trial designs are required to prioritise promising drugs within Phase II trials. Adaptive designs are examples of such designs, but their efficiency is reduced if there is a delay in assessing patient responses to treatment. Methods Motivated by the WIRE trial in renal cell carcinoma (NCT03741426), we compare three trial approaches to testing multiple treatment arms: (1) single-arm trials in sequence with interim analyses; (2) a parallel multi-arm multi-stage trial and (3) the design used in WIRE, which we call the Multi-Arm Sequential Trial with Efficient Recruitment (MASTER) design. The MASTER design recruits patients to one arm at a time, pausing recruitment to an arm when it has recruited the required number for an interim analysis. We conduct a simulation study to compare how long the three different trial designs take to evaluate a number of new treatment arms. Results The parallel multi-arm multi-stage and the MASTER design are much more efficient than separate trials. The MASTER design provides extra efficiency when there is endpoint delay, or recruitment is very quick. Conclusions We recommend the MASTER design as an efficient way of testing multiple promising cancer treatments in non-comparative Phase II trials.

Some early phase II trials in previously untreated multiple myeloma: The Royal Marsden experience

2001 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhawna Sirohi ◽  
Samar Kulkarni ◽  
Ray Powles
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Early Phase ◽  
Phase Ii Trials

Intrathecal Mafosfamide: A Preclinical Pharmacology and Phase I Trial

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 1555-1563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan M. Blaney ◽  
Frank M. Balis ◽  
Stacey Berg ◽  
Carola A.S. Arndt ◽  
Richard Heideman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase I Trial ◽  
Neoplastic Meningitis ◽  
In Vitro Cytotoxicity ◽  
Pharmacokinetic Studies ◽  
Preclinical Studies ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Cytotoxicity Studies

Purpose Preclinical studies of mafosfamide, a preactivated cyclophosphamide analog, were performed to define a tolerable and potentially active target concentration for intrathecal (IT) administration. A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of IT mafosfamide was performed to determine a dose for subsequent phase II trials. Patients and Methods In vitro cytotoxicity studies were performed in MCF-7, Molt-4, and rhabdomyosarcoma cell lines. Feasibility and pharmacokinetic studies were performed in nonhuman primates. These preclinical studies were followed by a phase I trial in patients with neoplastic meningitis. There were five dose levels ranging from 1 mg to 6.5 mg. Serial CSF samples were obtained for pharmacokinetic studies in a subset of patients with Ommaya reservoirs. Results The cytotoxic target exposure for mafosfamide was 10 μmol/L. Preclinical studies demonstrated that this concentration could be easily achieved in ventricular CSF after intraventricular dosing. In the phase I clinical trial, headache was the dose-limiting toxicity. Headache was ameliorated at 5 mg by prolonging the infusion rate to 20 minutes, but dose-limiting headache occurred at 6.5 mg dose with prolonged infusion. Ventricular CSF mafosfamide concentrations at 5 mg exceeded target cytotoxic concentrations after an intraventricular dose, but lumbar CSF concentrations 2 hours after the dose were less than 10 μmol/L. Therefore, a strategy to alternate dosing between the intralumbar and intraventricular routes was tested. Seven of 30 registrants who were assessable for response had a partial response, and six had stable disease. Conclusion The recommended phase II dose for IT mafosfamide, administered without concomitant analgesia, is 5 mg over 20 minutes.

scholarly journals Unconventional Anticancer Agents: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Vickers ◽  
Joyce Kuo ◽  
Barrie R. Cassileth
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Dose Finding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Off Label

Purpose A substantial number of cancer patients turn to treatments other than those recommended by mainstream oncologists in an effort to sustain tumor remission or halt the spread of cancer. These unconventional approaches include botanicals, high-dose nutritional supplementation, off-label pharmaceuticals, and animal products. The objective of this study was to review systematically the methodologies applied in clinical trials of unconventional treatments specifically for cancer. Methods MEDLINE 1966 to 2005 was searched using approximately 200 different medical subject heading terms (eg, alternative medicine) and free text words (eg, laetrile). We sought prospective clinical trials of unconventional treatments in cancer patients, excluding studies with only symptom control or nonclinical (eg, immune) end points. Trial data were extracted by two reviewers using a standardized protocol. Results We identified 14,735 articles, of which 214, describing 198 different clinical trials, were included. Twenty trials were phase I, three were phase I and II, 70 were phase II, and 105 were phase III. Approximately half of the trials investigated fungal products, 20% investigated other botanicals, 10% investigated vitamins and supplements, and 10% investigated off-label pharmaceuticals. Only eight of the phase I trials were dose-finding trials, and a mere 20% of phase II trials reported a statistical design. Of the 27 different agents tested in phase III, only one agent had a prior dose-finding trial, and only for three agents was the definitive study initiated after the publication of phase II data. Conclusion Unconventional cancer treatments have not been subject to appropriate early-phase trial development. Future research on unconventional therapies should involve dose-finding and phase II studies to determine the suitability of definitive trials.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document