Cargando…

Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection

BACKGROUND: Modern personalized medicine strategies builds on therapy companion diagnostics to stratify patients into subgroups with differential benefit/risk. In general, stratification for drug response implies a treatment-by-subgroup interaction. This interaction is usually suggested by the drug’...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huber, Cynthia, Friede, Tim, Stingl, Julia, Benda, Norbert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8854277/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34841493
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43441-021-00352-2
_version_ 1784653413527584768
author Huber, Cynthia
Friede, Tim
Stingl, Julia
Benda, Norbert
author_facet Huber, Cynthia
Friede, Tim
Stingl, Julia
Benda, Norbert
author_sort Huber, Cynthia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Modern personalized medicine strategies builds on therapy companion diagnostics to stratify patients into subgroups with differential benefit/risk. In general, stratification for drug response implies a treatment-by-subgroup interaction. This interaction is usually suggested by the drug’s mechanism of action and investigated in pharmacological research or in clinical studies. In these candidate genes or pathway approaches, either biological reasons for a differential benefit/risk or statistical interaction regarding a pharmacological or clinical endpoint or both may be given. For successful drug approval, demonstration of a positive benefit/risk balance in the intended patient population is required. This also applies to situations with biomarker-selected populations. However, further regulatory considerations relate to the usefulness and plausibility of the selected patients and benefit/risk extrapolations or alternative therapy options in biomarker-negative populations. METHODS: To facilitate the specification of regulatory requirements and support the design of clinical development programmes, a systematic classification of biomarker-drug pairs is needed, in particular with regard to the expected underlying molecular mechanism and the clinical evidence. RESULTS: A classification of five biomarker-drug categories is proposed related to increasing evidence on the biomarker’s predictive value in relation to a specific drug. We classified biomarkers into five ascending categories with increasing evidence on the predictive nature of the biomarker in relation to a specific drug according to the comparative pharmacological and clinical evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed classification will facilitate regulatory decision-making and support drug development with respect to biomarker-related subgrouping, both, during clinical programme and at the time of marketing authorization application, since the grade of evidence on the differential power of the biomarker can be considered as an indicator for the usefulness of a biomarker-related subgrouping.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8854277
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88542772022-02-23 Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection Huber, Cynthia Friede, Tim Stingl, Julia Benda, Norbert Ther Innov Regul Sci Original Research BACKGROUND: Modern personalized medicine strategies builds on therapy companion diagnostics to stratify patients into subgroups with differential benefit/risk. In general, stratification for drug response implies a treatment-by-subgroup interaction. This interaction is usually suggested by the drug’s mechanism of action and investigated in pharmacological research or in clinical studies. In these candidate genes or pathway approaches, either biological reasons for a differential benefit/risk or statistical interaction regarding a pharmacological or clinical endpoint or both may be given. For successful drug approval, demonstration of a positive benefit/risk balance in the intended patient population is required. This also applies to situations with biomarker-selected populations. However, further regulatory considerations relate to the usefulness and plausibility of the selected patients and benefit/risk extrapolations or alternative therapy options in biomarker-negative populations. METHODS: To facilitate the specification of regulatory requirements and support the design of clinical development programmes, a systematic classification of biomarker-drug pairs is needed, in particular with regard to the expected underlying molecular mechanism and the clinical evidence. RESULTS: A classification of five biomarker-drug categories is proposed related to increasing evidence on the biomarker’s predictive value in relation to a specific drug. We classified biomarkers into five ascending categories with increasing evidence on the predictive nature of the biomarker in relation to a specific drug according to the comparative pharmacological and clinical evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed classification will facilitate regulatory decision-making and support drug development with respect to biomarker-related subgrouping, both, during clinical programme and at the time of marketing authorization application, since the grade of evidence on the differential power of the biomarker can be considered as an indicator for the usefulness of a biomarker-related subgrouping. Springer International Publishing 2021-11-28 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8854277/ /pubmed/34841493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43441-021-00352-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Huber, Cynthia
Friede, Tim
Stingl, Julia
Benda, Norbert
Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection
title Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection
title_full Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection
title_fullStr Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection
title_full_unstemmed Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection
title_short Classification of Companion Diagnostics: A New Framework for Biomarker-Driven Patient Selection
title_sort classification of companion diagnostics: a new framework for biomarker-driven patient selection
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8854277/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34841493
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43441-021-00352-2
work_keys_str_mv AT hubercynthia classificationofcompaniondiagnosticsanewframeworkforbiomarkerdrivenpatientselection
AT friedetim classificationofcompaniondiagnosticsanewframeworkforbiomarkerdrivenpatientselection
AT stingljulia classificationofcompaniondiagnosticsanewframeworkforbiomarkerdrivenpatientselection
AT bendanorbert classificationofcompaniondiagnosticsanewframeworkforbiomarkerdrivenpatientselection