后续适应症的肿瘤药物剂量选择:我们能从 FDA 批准的肿瘤药物中学到什么?

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Clinical therapeutics Pub Date : 2024-09-19 DOI:10.1016/j.clinthera.2024.08.020
Huy X Ngo, Elise Oh, Chunze Li, Jiajie Yu
{"title":"后续适应症的肿瘤药物剂量选择:我们能从 FDA 批准的肿瘤药物中学到什么?","authors":"Huy X Ngo, Elise Oh, Chunze Li, Jiajie Yu","doi":"10.1016/j.clinthera.2024.08.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The modern oncology drug development landscape has shifted away from traditional cytotoxic chemotherapies. Following their initial approvals, many oncology drugs have been approved in subsequent indications either as monotherapy or in combination to benefit a broader patient population. To date, dose selection strategies for subsequent indications have not been systematically reviewed. This review examines how approved dosing regimens were selected in subsequent indications for FDA-approved oncology drugs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Drugs@FDA database was used to identify FDA-approved new molecular entities (NMEs) between 2010 and 2023. NMEs with more than 1 approved indication were included in the analysis. In total, the dosing regimens for 67 novel oncology drugs that obtained FDA approvals for multiple indications were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Overall, in subsequent indications, 72% of NMEs used the same or clinically equivalent alternative dosing regimens to those approved in the initial indications. Amongst the 28% of NMEs that used different dosing regimens, safety/tolerability was the leading cause of a dosing regimen changes in both monotherapy and combination therapy settings. Other factors leading to changes in dosing regimens include differences in tumor biology, disease burden, pharmacokinetics, and overall benefit-risk profiles obtained from dose-finding studies.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Our analysis highlighted the importance of selecting a safe, tolerable, and yet efficacious dosing regimen for the initial indication as a suboptimal initially approved regimen could lead to dosing regimen changes in later indications. Preclinical and clinical data could be leveraged to understand the pharmacology, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic differences between indications and thus support dose selection in subsequent indications.</p>","PeriodicalId":10699,"journal":{"name":"Clinical therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oncology Dose Selection in Subsequent Indications: What Can We Learn From FDA-approved Oncology Drugs?\",\"authors\":\"Huy X Ngo, Elise Oh, Chunze Li, Jiajie Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clinthera.2024.08.020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The modern oncology drug development landscape has shifted away from traditional cytotoxic chemotherapies. Following their initial approvals, many oncology drugs have been approved in subsequent indications either as monotherapy or in combination to benefit a broader patient population. To date, dose selection strategies for subsequent indications have not been systematically reviewed. This review examines how approved dosing regimens were selected in subsequent indications for FDA-approved oncology drugs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Drugs@FDA database was used to identify FDA-approved new molecular entities (NMEs) between 2010 and 2023. NMEs with more than 1 approved indication were included in the analysis. In total, the dosing regimens for 67 novel oncology drugs that obtained FDA approvals for multiple indications were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Overall, in subsequent indications, 72% of NMEs used the same or clinically equivalent alternative dosing regimens to those approved in the initial indications. Amongst the 28% of NMEs that used different dosing regimens, safety/tolerability was the leading cause of a dosing regimen changes in both monotherapy and combination therapy settings. Other factors leading to changes in dosing regimens include differences in tumor biology, disease burden, pharmacokinetics, and overall benefit-risk profiles obtained from dose-finding studies.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Our analysis highlighted the importance of selecting a safe, tolerable, and yet efficacious dosing regimen for the initial indication as a suboptimal initially approved regimen could lead to dosing regimen changes in later indications. Preclinical and clinical data could be leveraged to understand the pharmacology, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic differences between indications and thus support dose selection in subsequent indications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10699,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical therapeutics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2024.08.020\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2024.08.020","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:现代肿瘤药物的开发已从传统的细胞毒性化学疗法转变而来。许多肿瘤药物在首次获批后,又被批准用于后续适应症,无论是单药治疗还是联合用药,以造福更广泛的患者群体。迄今为止,尚未对后续适应症的剂量选择策略进行过系统回顾。本综述研究了 FDA 批准的肿瘤药物在后续适应症中如何选择已获批准的给药方案:方法:使用Drugs@FDA数据库识别2010年至2023年期间FDA批准的新分子实体(NMEs)。具有一个以上批准适应症的新分子实体被纳入分析。总共对 67 种获得 FDA 批准用于多个适应症的新型肿瘤药物的给药方案进行了评估:总体而言,在后续适应症中,72%的 NMEs 采用了与最初适应症所批准的相同或临床效果相当的替代给药方案。在使用不同给药方案的 28% 的 NMEs 中,安全性/耐受性是导致单一疗法和联合疗法给药方案改变的主要原因。导致改变给药方案的其他因素包括肿瘤生物学差异、疾病负担、药代动力学以及从剂量试验研究中获得的总体获益-风险概况:我们的分析强调了为最初适应症选择安全、可耐受且有效的给药方案的重要性,因为最初批准的次优方案可能会导致以后适应症的给药方案改变。可以利用临床前和临床数据来了解不同适应症的药理学、药动学和药效学差异,从而为后续适应症的剂量选择提供支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Oncology Dose Selection in Subsequent Indications: What Can We Learn From FDA-approved Oncology Drugs?

Purpose: The modern oncology drug development landscape has shifted away from traditional cytotoxic chemotherapies. Following their initial approvals, many oncology drugs have been approved in subsequent indications either as monotherapy or in combination to benefit a broader patient population. To date, dose selection strategies for subsequent indications have not been systematically reviewed. This review examines how approved dosing regimens were selected in subsequent indications for FDA-approved oncology drugs.

Methods: The Drugs@FDA database was used to identify FDA-approved new molecular entities (NMEs) between 2010 and 2023. NMEs with more than 1 approved indication were included in the analysis. In total, the dosing regimens for 67 novel oncology drugs that obtained FDA approvals for multiple indications were evaluated.

Findings: Overall, in subsequent indications, 72% of NMEs used the same or clinically equivalent alternative dosing regimens to those approved in the initial indications. Amongst the 28% of NMEs that used different dosing regimens, safety/tolerability was the leading cause of a dosing regimen changes in both monotherapy and combination therapy settings. Other factors leading to changes in dosing regimens include differences in tumor biology, disease burden, pharmacokinetics, and overall benefit-risk profiles obtained from dose-finding studies.

Implications: Our analysis highlighted the importance of selecting a safe, tolerable, and yet efficacious dosing regimen for the initial indication as a suboptimal initially approved regimen could lead to dosing regimen changes in later indications. Preclinical and clinical data could be leveraged to understand the pharmacology, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic differences between indications and thus support dose selection in subsequent indications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical therapeutics
Clinical therapeutics 医学-药学
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.10%
发文量
154
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Therapeutics provides peer-reviewed, rapid publication of recent developments in drug and other therapies as well as in diagnostics, pharmacoeconomics, health policy, treatment outcomes, and innovations in drug and biologics research. In addition Clinical Therapeutics features updates on specific topics collated by expert Topic Editors. Clinical Therapeutics is read by a large international audience of scientists and clinicians in a variety of research, academic, and clinical practice settings. Articles are indexed by all major biomedical abstracting databases.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Sex and Gender in Precision Emergency Medicine: A Scoping Review and Proposed Hierarchy. Sex Differences in Testing for Pulmonary Embolism Among Emergency Department Patients Aged 18-49 by Chief Complaint. The Efficacy Research of Prophylactic PEG-rhG-CSF in Preventing Neutropenia in Early-Stage Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Docetaxel-Based Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Analysis. Correlation Between Vitamin D, Inflammatory Markers, and T Lymphocytes With the Severity of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and its Effect on the Risk of Acute Exacerbation: A Single Cross-sectional Study. Understanding Variation Among Medical Device Reporting Sources: A Study of the MAUDE Database.
×
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:481959085
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