Clinical Trial Designs for Prospective Validation of Biomarkers
- 68 Downloads
Traditionally, anatomic staging systems have been used to determine predictions of individual patient outcome and, to a lesser extent, guide the choice of treatment in patients with cancer. With new targeted therapies, the role of biomarkers is increasingly promising, suggesting an integrated approach using the genetic make-up of the tumor and the genotype of the patient for treatment selection and patient management. Specifically, biomarkers can aid in patient stratification (risk assessment), treatment response identification (surrogate markers), or in differential diagnosis (identifying individuals who are likely to respond to specific drugs). To be clinically useful, a marker must favorably affect clinical outcomes such as decreased toxicity, increased overall and/or disease-free survival, or improved quality of life.
This paper focuses on possible clinical trial designs for assessing the utility of a predictive marker(s) for toxicity or clinical efficacy. We consider the scenario of single and multiple markers as well as present alternative solutions based on the prevalence of a marker. Our designs rest on the assumption that the methods for assessment of the biomarker are established and the initial results show promise with regard to the predictive ability of a marker. Additional research is clearly warranted to achieve the goal of ‘predictive oncology’.
KeywordsTamoxifen Irinotecan Cetuximab Recurrence Score Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Gene
Supported in part by National Cancer Institute grants: Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (CA-15083) and the North Central Cancer Treatment Group (CA-25224). The authors have no potential conflicts of interest directly relevant to the contents of this review.
- 19.Goetz MP, Safgren S, Goldberg RM, et al. A phase I does escalation study of irinotecan (CPT-11), oxaliplatin (Oxal) capecitabine (Cap) within three UGT1 A1 TA promoter cohorts (6/6, 6/7, and 7/7) [abstract no. 2014]. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; 2005 May 13–17; Orlando (FL). J Clin Oncol 2005; 28(16S): 138sGoogle Scholar
- 25.Loi S, Piccart M, Haibe-Kains B, et al. Prediction of early distant relapses on tamoxifen in early-stage breast cancer (BC): a potential tool for adjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) tailoring [abstract no. 509]. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; 2005 May 13–17; Orlando (FL). J Clin Oncol 2005; 28(16S): 6sGoogle Scholar
- 29.Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. Expression of the 21 genes in the recurrence score assay and prediction of clinical benefit from tamoxifen in NSABP study B-14 and chemotherapy in NSABP study B-20 [abstract no. 24]. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004; 88: S15Google Scholar
- 31.Winer EP, Hudis C, Burstein HJ, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment on the use of aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: status report 2004. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23(3): 619–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Kurbacher CM, Grecu OM, Stier U, et al. ATP Chemosensitivity testing in ovarian and breast cancer: early clinical trials. Recent Results Cancer Res 2003; 161: 221–30Google Scholar
- 36.Romond J. Special session: modoclonal antibody therapy in breast cancer. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; 2005 May 13–17; Orlando (FL)Google Scholar
- 37.Perez E. Special session: monoclonal antibody therapy in breast cancer. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; 2005 May 13–17; Orlando (FL)Google Scholar