Cargando…

Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution

BACKGROUND: With the rapid influx of novel anti‐cancer agents, phase I clinical trials in oncology are evolving. Historically, response rates on early phase trials have been modest with the clinical benefit and ethics of enrolment debated. However, there is a paucity of real‐world data in this setti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Menon, Siddharth, Davies, Amy, Frentzas, Sophia, Hawkins, Cheryl‐Ann, Segelov, Eva, Day, Daphne, Markman, Ben
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842700/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34245134
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cnr2.1465
_version_ 1784651103298650112
author Menon, Siddharth
Davies, Amy
Frentzas, Sophia
Hawkins, Cheryl‐Ann
Segelov, Eva
Day, Daphne
Markman, Ben
author_facet Menon, Siddharth
Davies, Amy
Frentzas, Sophia
Hawkins, Cheryl‐Ann
Segelov, Eva
Day, Daphne
Markman, Ben
author_sort Menon, Siddharth
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: With the rapid influx of novel anti‐cancer agents, phase I clinical trials in oncology are evolving. Historically, response rates on early phase trials have been modest with the clinical benefit and ethics of enrolment debated. However, there is a paucity of real‐world data in this setting. AIM: To better understand the changing landscape of phase I oncology trials, we performed a retrospective review at our institution to examine patient and trial characteristics, screening outcomes, and treatment outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed all consecutive adult patients with advanced solid organ malignancies who were screened across phase I trials from January 2013 to December 2018 at a single institution. During this period, 242 patients were assessed for 28 different trials. Median age was 64 years (range 30–89) with an equal sex distribution. Among 257 screening visits, the overall screen failure rate was 18%, resulting in 212 patients being enrolled onto a study. Twenty‐six trials (93%) involved immunotherapeutic agents or molecular targeted agents either alone or in combination, with only two trials of cytotoxic agents (7%). Twenty‐two (13.4%) of the 209 treated patients experienced a total of 33 grade 3 or higher treatment‐related adverse events. There was one treatment‐related death (0.5%). Of 190 response‐evaluable patients, 7 (4%) had a complete response, 34 (18%) a partial response, and 59 (31%) experienced stable disease for a disease control rate of 53%. The median overall survival for our cohort was 8.0 (95% CI: 6.8–9.2) months. CONCLUSION: The profile of phase I trials at our institution are consistent with the changing early drug development landscape. Response rates and overall survival in our cohort are superior to historically reported rates and comparable to contemporaneous studies. Severe treatment‐related toxicity was relatively uncommon, and treatment‐related mortality was rare.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8842700
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88427002022-02-24 Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution Menon, Siddharth Davies, Amy Frentzas, Sophia Hawkins, Cheryl‐Ann Segelov, Eva Day, Daphne Markman, Ben Cancer Rep (Hoboken) Original Articles BACKGROUND: With the rapid influx of novel anti‐cancer agents, phase I clinical trials in oncology are evolving. Historically, response rates on early phase trials have been modest with the clinical benefit and ethics of enrolment debated. However, there is a paucity of real‐world data in this setting. AIM: To better understand the changing landscape of phase I oncology trials, we performed a retrospective review at our institution to examine patient and trial characteristics, screening outcomes, and treatment outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed all consecutive adult patients with advanced solid organ malignancies who were screened across phase I trials from January 2013 to December 2018 at a single institution. During this period, 242 patients were assessed for 28 different trials. Median age was 64 years (range 30–89) with an equal sex distribution. Among 257 screening visits, the overall screen failure rate was 18%, resulting in 212 patients being enrolled onto a study. Twenty‐six trials (93%) involved immunotherapeutic agents or molecular targeted agents either alone or in combination, with only two trials of cytotoxic agents (7%). Twenty‐two (13.4%) of the 209 treated patients experienced a total of 33 grade 3 or higher treatment‐related adverse events. There was one treatment‐related death (0.5%). Of 190 response‐evaluable patients, 7 (4%) had a complete response, 34 (18%) a partial response, and 59 (31%) experienced stable disease for a disease control rate of 53%. The median overall survival for our cohort was 8.0 (95% CI: 6.8–9.2) months. CONCLUSION: The profile of phase I trials at our institution are consistent with the changing early drug development landscape. Response rates and overall survival in our cohort are superior to historically reported rates and comparable to contemporaneous studies. Severe treatment‐related toxicity was relatively uncommon, and treatment‐related mortality was rare. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8842700/ /pubmed/34245134 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cnr2.1465 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Cancer Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Menon, Siddharth
Davies, Amy
Frentzas, Sophia
Hawkins, Cheryl‐Ann
Segelov, Eva
Day, Daphne
Markman, Ben
Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution
title Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution
title_full Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution
title_fullStr Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution
title_full_unstemmed Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution
title_short Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six‐year experience in a large institution
title_sort recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase i oncology trials: six‐year experience in a large institution
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8842700/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34245134
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cnr2.1465
work_keys_str_mv AT menonsiddharth recruitmentoutcomesandtoxicitytrendsinphaseioncologytrialssixyearexperienceinalargeinstitution
AT daviesamy recruitmentoutcomesandtoxicitytrendsinphaseioncologytrialssixyearexperienceinalargeinstitution
AT frentzassophia recruitmentoutcomesandtoxicitytrendsinphaseioncologytrialssixyearexperienceinalargeinstitution
AT hawkinscherylann recruitmentoutcomesandtoxicitytrendsinphaseioncologytrialssixyearexperienceinalargeinstitution
AT segeloveva recruitmentoutcomesandtoxicitytrendsinphaseioncologytrialssixyearexperienceinalargeinstitution
AT daydaphne recruitmentoutcomesandtoxicitytrendsinphaseioncologytrialssixyearexperienceinalargeinstitution
AT markmanben recruitmentoutcomesandtoxicitytrendsinphaseioncologytrialssixyearexperienceinalargeinstitution