Proportion of patients in phase 2 oncology trials receiving treatments that are ultimately approved

Charlotte Ouimet, Bianca Fodor, Joseph C Del Paggio, Jonathan Kimmelman
{"title":"Proportion of patients in phase 2 oncology trials receiving treatments that are ultimately approved","authors":"Charlotte Ouimet, Bianca Fodor, Joseph C Del Paggio, Jonathan Kimmelman","doi":"10.1093/jnci/djaf013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Many patients enroll in phase 1 dose expansion cohorts or phase 2 clinical trials (together referred to below as “phase 2”) seeking access to novel treatments. Little is known about the extent to which they benefit by enrolling. Herein, we use a novel metric of benefit—therapeutic proportion—to assess the probability that patients in phase 2 trials receive treatment that eventually advances to FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approval for their condition. Methods We randomly sampled 400 trials identified in a search of Clinicaltrials.gov for cancer phase 2 trials initiated between November 1, 2012 and November 1, 2015. We determined whether the drug/dose/indication tested in each trial advanced to FDA approval within 7.5 years. We determined whether the drug/dose/indication presented substantial clinical benefit using the ESMO-MCBS (European Society for Medical Oncology - Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale), or whether it received off-label recommendation in NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines. Results Collectively, trials in our sample enrolled 25 002 patient-participants in 608 specific treatment cohorts. A total of 4045 patients received a treatment that advanced to FDA approval (16.2%; 95% CI = 10.3 to 22.7). The therapeutic proportion increased to 19.4% (95% CI = 14.1 to 25.8) when considering NCCN off-label recommendations and decreased to 9.3% (95% CI = 4.7 to 14.6) for FDA-approved regimens considered being of substantial clinical benefit by ESMO-MCBS. Bootstrap test of mean difference showed no statistical difference in proportions based on drug class, trial phase, or sponsorship. Conclusion One in 6 patients in phase 2 clinical trials receives treatments that are eventually approved. This represents a higher therapeutic value than phase 1 trials.","PeriodicalId":501635,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the National Cancer Institute","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaf013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Many patients enroll in phase 1 dose expansion cohorts or phase 2 clinical trials (together referred to below as “phase 2”) seeking access to novel treatments. Little is known about the extent to which they benefit by enrolling. Herein, we use a novel metric of benefit—therapeutic proportion—to assess the probability that patients in phase 2 trials receive treatment that eventually advances to FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approval for their condition. Methods We randomly sampled 400 trials identified in a search of Clinicaltrials.gov for cancer phase 2 trials initiated between November 1, 2012 and November 1, 2015. We determined whether the drug/dose/indication tested in each trial advanced to FDA approval within 7.5 years. We determined whether the drug/dose/indication presented substantial clinical benefit using the ESMO-MCBS (European Society for Medical Oncology - Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale), or whether it received off-label recommendation in NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network) guidelines. Results Collectively, trials in our sample enrolled 25 002 patient-participants in 608 specific treatment cohorts. A total of 4045 patients received a treatment that advanced to FDA approval (16.2%; 95% CI = 10.3 to 22.7). The therapeutic proportion increased to 19.4% (95% CI = 14.1 to 25.8) when considering NCCN off-label recommendations and decreased to 9.3% (95% CI = 4.7 to 14.6) for FDA-approved regimens considered being of substantial clinical benefit by ESMO-MCBS. Bootstrap test of mean difference showed no statistical difference in proportions based on drug class, trial phase, or sponsorship. Conclusion One in 6 patients in phase 2 clinical trials receives treatments that are eventually approved. This represents a higher therapeutic value than phase 1 trials.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
接受最终批准治疗的2期肿瘤试验患者比例
背景:许多患者参加1期剂量扩大队列或2期临床试验(以下统称为“2期”),寻求获得新的治疗方法。很少有人知道他们在多大程度上受益于入学。在本文中,我们使用了一种新的获益度量-治疗比例-来评估2期试验患者接受治疗并最终获得FDA(食品和药物管理局)批准的可能性。方法:我们随机抽取从Clinicaltrials.gov网站检索到的400项试验,这些试验是在2012年11月1日至2015年11月1日期间启动的癌症2期试验。我们确定每个试验中测试的药物/剂量/适应症是否在7.5年内获得FDA批准。我们使用ESMO-MCBS(欧洲肿瘤医学学会-临床获益等级量表)来确定药物/剂量/适应症是否显示出实质性的临床获益,或者它是否获得了NCCN(国家综合癌症网络)指南的标签外推荐。总的来说,我们样本中的试验纳入了608个特定治疗队列的25002名患者参与者。共有4045名患者接受了提前获得FDA批准的治疗(16.2%;95% CI = 10.3 ~ 22.7)。当考虑NCCN标签外推荐时,治疗比例增加到19.4% (95% CI = 14.1至25.8),而对于fda批准的ESMO-MCBS认为具有实质性临床益处的方案,治疗比例下降到9.3% (95% CI = 4.7至14.6)。平均差异的Bootstrap检验显示,基于药物类别、试验阶段或赞助的比例无统计学差异。结论:在2期临床试验中,每6例患者中就有1例接受了最终批准的治疗。这代表着比一期试验更高的治疗价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Rare cancers research: Current state of knowledge and emerging opportunities for prevention and interception. Quality of life and care experiences in a US multi-institutional neuroendocrine tumor cohort. Methylation signatures distinguish non small cell lung cancer subtypes and associated with survival in smokers with lung squamous cell carcinoma. Advance care planning and caregiver outcomes in advanced cancer: an essential metric of success. Divergent effects of PLA2G7 on prostate cancer biochemical recurrence in european American and african American men.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1