Trial Designs for Personalizing Cancer Care: A Systematic Review and Classification

被引:43
作者
Tajik, Parvin [1 ,2 ]
Zwinderman, Aleiko H. [1 ]
Mol, Ben W. [2 ]
Bossuyt, Patrick M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol Biostat & Bioinformat, NL-1100 DE Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, NL-1100 DE Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
PREDICTIVE BIOMARKER VALIDATION; II CLINICAL-TRIALS; BAYESIAN ADAPTIVE DESIGN; PATIENT ENRICHMENT; LUNG-CANCER; DRUG; DISCOVERY; PHARMACOGENOMICS; CHALLENGES; MEDICINE;
D O I
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-3722
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 [肿瘤学];
摘要
There is an increasing interest in the evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers for personalizing cancer care. The literature on the trial designs for evaluation of these markers is diverse and there is no consensus in the classification or nomenclature. We set this study to review the literature systematically, to identify the proposed trial designs, and to develop a classification scheme. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Methodology Register, and MathSciNet up to January 2013 for articles describing these trial designs. In each eligible article, we identified the trial designs presented and extracted the term used for labeling the design, components of patient flow (marker status of eligible participants, intervention, and comparator), study questions, and analysis plan. Our search strategy resulted in 88 eligible articles, wherein 315 labels had been used by authors in presenting trial designs; 134 of these were unique. By analyzing patient flow components, we could classify the 134 unique design labels into four basic patient flow categories, which we labeled with the most frequently used term: single-arm, enrichment, randomize-all, and biomarker-strategy designs. A fifth category consists of combinations of the other four patient flow categories. Our review showed that a considerable number of labels has been proposed for trial designs evaluating prognostic and predictive biomarkers which, based on patient flow elements, can be classified into five basic categories. The classification system proposed here could help clinicians and researchers in designing and interpreting trials evaluating predictive biomarkers, and could reduce confusion in labeling and reporting. (C)2013 AACR.
引用
收藏
页码:4578 / 4588
页数:11
相关论文
共 91 条
[1]
A 2-Stage Phase II Design with Direct Assignment Option in Stage II for Initial Marker Validation [J].
An, Ming-Wen ;
Mandrekar, Sumithra J. ;
Sargent, Daniel J. .
CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2012, 18 (16) :4225-4233
[2]
Ang MK, 2010, EXPERT REV ANTICANC, V10, P427, DOI [10.1586/era.09.178, 10.1586/ERA.09.178]
[3]
Baker SG, 2012, DISCOV MED, V13, P187
[4]
Integrating predictive biomarkers and classifiers into oncology clinical development programmes [J].
Beckman, Robert A. ;
Clark, Jason ;
Chen, Cong .
NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY, 2011, 10 (10) :735-748
[5]
Reports from the 2010 Clinical and Translational Cancer Research Think Tank Meeting: Design Strategies for Personalized Therapy Trials [J].
Berry, Donald A. ;
Herbst, Roy S. ;
Rubin, Eric H. .
CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2012, 18 (03) :638-644
[6]
Randomised comparisons of medical tests: sometimes invalid, not always efficient [J].
Bossuyt, PMM ;
Lijmer, JG ;
Mol, BWJ .
LANCET, 2000, 356 (9244) :1844-1847
[7]
Bossuyt PMM, 2009, MED TESTS WHITE PAPE
[8]
Targeting targeted agents: open issues for clinical trial design [J].
Bria, Emilio ;
Di Maio, Massimo ;
Carlini, Paolo ;
Cuppone, Federica ;
Giannarelli, Diana ;
Cognetti, Francesco ;
Milella, Michele .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL & CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2009, 28
[9]
Towards validation of statistically reliable biomarkers [J].
Buyse, Marc .
EJC SUPPLEMENTS, 2007, 5 (05) :89-95
[10]
Buyse M, 2011, EXPERT REV MOL DIAGN, V11, P171, DOI [10.1586/erm.10.120, 10.1586/ERM.10.120]