Search

Introduction: Early phase clinical trials (EPCTs) enable access to novel therapies for patients who have exhausted standard of care treatment and contribute a crucial role in drug development and research. Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) or socially disadvantaged patients have notably lower rates of participation in these trials. We aimed to characterise the social and cultural demographics of patients enrolled on an EPCT in South Western Sydney. Methods: We conducted a 10-year retrospective review of patients enrolled on a EPCT at Liverpool Hospital. CALD patients were defined as those born overseas or whose preferred language was other than English. The patient residential address was used to calculate distance travelled, and the Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage (IRSD) and Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage (IRSAD) scores were calculated and used as a surrogate for socioeconomic status (SES). Results: Our study included 233 patients across 39 EPCTs. Ninety-one patients (39%) were identified as CALD. The median IRSD and IRSAD scores were 941 and 944, respectively, with 62.7–67.4% of patients residing in an area with greater disadvantage compared to the median of Australia. The median distance travelled was 17 kilometres with only 12% of participants travelling more than 50 km. CALD patients were more likely to reside in an area of low SES (OR 3.4, 95% CI: 1.8–6.5, p < 0.01) and travelled shorter median distances (10 vs. 23 km) when compared to non-CALD patients. Conclusion: Our study cohort contained a lower proportion of CALD patients and a higher SES than what we might have expected from our local population. Furthermore, there was a trend toward greater SES disadvantage (lower IRSD/IRSAD scores) for the CALD population. This study provides novel Australian data to support the underrepresentation of culturally diverse or disadvantaged patients on EPCTs. Future efforts should be made to reduce barriers to participation and improve equity in clinical trial participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To study Swedish pediatric oncologists’ practical and emotional experiences of referring, including and/or treating children in early-phase clinical trials. Methods: A nationwide study was conducted using a mixed-method approach. Structured interviews based on a study-specific questionnaire and participants’ personal reflections were utilized. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while participants’ comments were analyzed using thematic analysis. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Results: In total, 29 physicians with 4 to 32 years of experience in pediatric oncology participated, with 19 (66%) having > 10 years of experience. Three themes appeared: 1) Optimization-based approach focused on finding the most suitable treatment and care for every child with a refractory/relapsed cancer eligible for an early-phase clinical trial; 2) Team-based approach aimed at establishing local and national consensus in decision-making for treatment options, including early-phase clinical trials and palliative care; 3) Family-based approach in which the physicians provided families with actionable information, listened to their desires, and endeavored to maintain hope in challenging circumstances. Several participants (40% with ≤ 10 years of experience and 58% with > 10 years of experience) viewed the early-phase clinical trial as a potential “chance of cure”. A majority (80%) of physicians with ≤ 10 years of experience, reported that they often or always felt personally and emotionally affected by communication regarding early-phase clinical trials. Delivering difficult news in cases of uncertain prognosis was identified as the major challenge. None of the study participants felt adequately prepared in terms of sufficient knowledge and experience regarding early-phase clinical trials. The physicians expressed a need for guidance and training in communication to address these challenges Conclusions: Working with early-phase clinical trials highlight a field where physicians cannot solely rely on their expertise or past experiences, and where they are likely to be deeply emotionally involved. Physicians who care for children eligible for such studies require targeted educational initiatives and supervision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AimTo study Swedish pediatric oncologists’ practical and emotional experiences of referring, including and/or treating children in early-phase clinical trials.MethodsA nationwide study was conducted using a mixed-method approach. Structured interviews based on a study-specific questionnaire and participants’ personal reflections were utilized. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while participants’ comments were analyzed using thematic analysis. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim.ResultsIn total, 29 physicians with 4 to 32 years of experience in pediatric oncology participated, with 19 (66%) having > 10 years of experience. Three themes appeared: 1) Optimization-based approach focused on finding the most suitable treatment and care for every child with a refractory/relapsed cancer eligible for an early-phase clinical trial; 2) Team-based approach aimed at establishing local and national consensus in decision-making for treatment options, including early-phase clinical trials and palliative care; 3) Family-based approach in which the physicians provided families with actionable information, listened to their desires, and endeavored to maintain hope in challenging circumstances. Several participants (40% with ≤ 10 years of experience and 58% with > 10 years of experience) viewed the early-phase clinical trial as a potential “chance of cure”. A majority (80%) of physicians with ≤ 10 years of experience, reported that they often or always felt personally and emotionally affected by communication regarding early-phase clinical trials. Delivering difficult news in cases of uncertain prognosis was identified as the major challenge. None of the study participants felt adequately prepared in terms of sufficient knowledge and experience regarding early-phase clinical trials. The physicians expressed a need for guidance and training in communication to address these challenges.ConclusionsWorking with early-phase clinical trials highlight a field where physicians cannot solely rely on their expertise or past experiences, and where they are likely to be deeply emotionally involved. Physicians who care for children eligible for such studies require targeted educational initiatives and supervision.

A 2017 service evaluation identified a lack of information and knowledge among patients who were referred on to early phase oncology clinical trials (Hood, 2020). An educational booklet was developed to improve patients’ knowledge and experience. To build upon this work, a patient co-designed website was developed. This study examined the impact, if any, of a patient codesigned educational intervention within the clinical pathway for patients who are referred for an early phase oncology clinical trial at an experimental cancer medicine centre (ECMC). Aims: 1. To understand the experiences of patients who have been referred to an ECMC for an early phase clinical trial pre- and post-intervention. 2. To investigate if the intervention reduced anxiety levels in newly referred patients. Method: A convergent mixed-methods design was used in this study, to collect quantitative and qualitative data in parallel. Outcomes: This study examined the experiences of advanced cancer patients who attended their initial research outpatient appointment to discuss the possibility of taking part in an early phase clinical trial and the impact of an educational resource. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pharmacometabolomics in early phase clinical trials demonstrate the metabolic profiles of a subject responding to a drug treatment in a controlled environment, whereas pharmacokinetics measure the drug plasma concentration in human circulation. Application of the personalized peak plasma concentration from pharmacokinetics in pharmacometabolomic studies provides insights into drugs' pharmacological effects through dysregulation of metabolic pathways or pharmacodynamic biomarkers. This proof-of-concept study integrates personalized pharmacokinetic and pharmacometabolomic approaches to determine the predictive pharmacodynamic response of human metabolic pathways for type 2 diabetes. In this study, we use metformin as a model drug. Metformin is a first-line glucose-lowering agent; however, the variation of metabolites that potentially affect the efficacy and safety profile remains inconclusive. Seventeen healthy subjects were given a single dose of 1000 mg of metformin under fasting conditions. Fifteen sampling time-points were collected and analyzed using the validated bioanalytical LCMS method for metformin quantification in plasma. The individualized peak-concentration plasma samples determined from the pharmacokinetic parameters calculated using Matlab Simbiology were further analyzed with pre-dose plasma samples using an untargeted metabolomic approach. Pharmacometabolomic data processing and statistical analysis were performed using MetaboAnalyst with a functional meta-analysis peaks-to-pathway approach to identify dysregulated human metabolic pathways. The validated metformin calibration ranged from 80.4 to 2010 ng/mL for accuracy, precision, stability and others. The median and IQR for Cmax was 1248 (849–1391) ng/mL; AUC0-infinity was 9510 (7314–10,411) ng·h/mL, and Tmax was 2.5 (2.5–3.0) h. The individualized Cmax pharmacokinetics guided the untargeted pharmacometabolomics of metformin, suggesting a series of provisional predictive human metabolic pathways, which include arginine and proline metabolism, branched-chain amino acid (BCAA) metabolism, glutathione metabolism and others that are associated with metformin's pharmacological effects of increasing insulin sensitivity and lipid metabolism. Integration of pharmacokinetic and pharmacometabolomic approaches in early-phase clinical trials may pave a pathway for developing targeted therapy. This could further reduce variability in a controlled trial environment and aid in identifying surrogates for drug response pathways, increasing the prediction of responders for dose selection in phase II clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Novel therapies often fail to reach the bedside due to low trial recruitment rates. Prior to conducting one of the first chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy trials in Canada, we used the Theoretical Domains Framework, a novel tool for identifying barriers and enablers to behavior change, to identify physician-related barriers and enablers to screening and recruiting patients for an early phase immunotherapy trial. Methods We conducted interviews with hematologists across Canada and used a directed content analysis to identify relevant domains reflecting the key factors that may affect screening and recruitment. Results In total, we interviewed 15 hematologists. Physicians expressed “cautious hope”; while expressing safety, feasibility, and screening criteria concerns, 14 out of 15 hematologists intended to screen for the trial (domains: knowledge, goals, beliefs about consequences, intentions). Physicians underscored the “challenging contexts,” identifying resources, workload, forgetting, and patient wait times to receive CAR T cells as key practical barriers to screening (domains: environmental context and resources, memory, attention and decision-making, behavioral regulation). They also highlighted “variability in roles and procedures” that may lead to missed trial candidates (domain: social and professional role). Left unaddressed, these barriers may undermine trial recruitment. Conclusions This study is among the first to use the Theoretical Domains Framework from the physician perspective to identify recruitment challenges to early phase trials and demonstrates the value of this approach for identifying barriers to screening and recruitment that may not otherwise have been elicited. This approach can optimize trial procedures and may serve to inform future promising early phase cancer therapy trials. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03765177 . Registered on December 5, 2018.

Simple Summary: Early phase clinical trials are an essential part of modern drug development and thus the advance of anti-cancer therapies for patients. However, deciding whether to participate in such trials can be complex and patients have reported decisional conflict (i.e., unresolved decisional needs). The aim of our study was to untangle several factors that contribute to decisional conflict in patients with advanced cancer who have recently been asked to decide whether to participate in early phase clinical trials. We found that patients experienced less decisional conflict if they had a better global health status, higher satisfaction, and made their decision sooner. Other factors, such as the decision to (not) participate, did not prove to be the best indicators for decisional conflict. With these insights, we can start to build hypotheses on how to improve the decision-making process for patients with end-stage cancer, which can ultimately improve their quality of life. When standard treatment options are not available anymore, patients with advanced cancer may participate in early phase clinical trials. Improving this complex decision-making process may improve their quality of life. Therefore, this prospective multicenter study with questionnaires untangles several contributing factors to decisional conflict (which reflects the quality of decision-making) in patients with advanced cancer who recently decided upon early phase clinical trial participation (phase I or I/II). We hypothesized that health-related quality of life, health literacy, sense of hope, satisfaction with the consultation, timing of the decision, and the decision explain decisional conflict. Mean decisional conflict in 116 patients was 30.0 (SD = 16.9). Multivariate regression analysis showed that less decisional conflict was reported by patients with better global health status (β = −0.185, p = 0.018), higher satisfaction (β = −0.246, p = 0.002), and who made the decision before (β = −0.543, p < 0.001) or within a week after the consultation (β = −0.427, p < 0.001). These variables explained 37% of the variance in decisional conflict. Healthcare professionals should realize that patients with lower global health status and who need more time to decide may require additional support. Although altering such patient intrinsic characteristics is difficult, oncologists can impact the satisfaction with the consultation. Future research should verify whether effective patient-centered communication could prevent decisional conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Traditional approaches in dose-finding trials, such as the continual reassessment method, focus on identifying the maximum tolerated dose. In contemporary early-phase dose-finding trials, especially in oncology with targeted agents or immunotherapy, a more relevant aim is to identify the lowest dose level that maximises efficacy whilst remaining tolerable. Backfilling , defined as the practice of assigning patients to dose levels lower than the current highest tolerated dose, has been proposed to gather additional pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and biomarker data to recommend the most appropriate dose to carry forward for subsequent studies. The first formal framework [5] for backfilling proposed randomising backfill patients with equal probability among those doses below the dose level where the study is currently at. Here, we propose to use Bayesian response-adaptive randomisation to backfill patients. This patient-oriented approach to backfilling aims to allocate more patients to dose levels in the backfill set with higher expected efficacy based on emerging data. The backfill set constitutes of the doses below the dose the dose-finding algorithm is at. At study completion, collective patient data inform the dose-response curve, suggesting an optimal dose level balancing toxicity and efficacy. Our simulation study across diverse clinical trial settings demonstrates that a backfilling strategy using Bayesian response-adaptive randomisation can result in a patient-oriented patient assignment procedure which simultaneously enhances the likelihood of correctly identifying the most appropriate dose level. This contribution offers a methodological framework and practical implementation for patient-oriented backfilling, encompassing design and analysis considerations in early-phase trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Patients who enroll on early phase clinical trials (EPCTs) usually have advanced cancer and heightened symptomatology, yet maintain a robust performance status that qualifies them for clinical trial participation. • These patients require a tailored palliative care approach that acknowledges the time toxicity experienced by patients enrolled in EPCTs and addresses the challenges posed by shortages within the palliative care workforce. • We suggest that every patient with advanced cancer referred to EPCT be referred to palliative care to be seen concurrently while undergoing screening for trials, with follow up during trial determined by clinical need. We also recommend every patient re-engage with palliative care at end of trial if no longer attending palliative care clinic. • A multi-disciplinary palliative care intervention with an embedded palliative care practitioner within EPCT clinics would be the optimal intervention for this population of patients. Advancements in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, with early phase clinical trials (EPCTs) serving as important initial steps in evaluating novel therapies. Recent studies have shown that response rates in these trials have doubled in the last twenty years. Patients who enroll on EPCTs have advanced cancer and heightened symptomatology yet maintain a robust performance status that qualifies them for clinical trial participation. It is well established that many of these patients have needs that can be addressed by palliative care, including symptom management, value assessments, advance care planning, and psychosocial and spiritual support. Several small studies have aimed to identify the most beneficial palliative care intervention for this cohort of patients, ranging from formal clinic-based multidisciplinary palliative care interventions to home-based interventions. While outcomes have trended towards benefit for patients, especially pertaining to psychological well-being, most studies were not powered to detect additional benefits for improved physical symptom management, reduction in care utilization or increased length of time on trial. In this review, we discuss the unique palliative care needs of this population and what we can learn from results of past interventional studies. We advocate for a tailored palliative care approach that acknowledges the time toxicity experienced by patients enrolled in EPCTs and address challenges posed by shortages within the palliative care workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Novel therapies often fail to reach the bedside due to low trial recruitment rates. Prior to conducting one of the first chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy trials in Canada, we used the Theoretical Domains Framework, a novel tool for identifying barriers and enablers to behavior change, to identify physician-related barriers and enablers to screening and recruiting patients for an early phase immunotherapy trial.Methods: We conducted interviews with hematologists across Canada and used a directed content analysis to identify relevant domains reflecting the key factors that may affect screening and recruitment.Results: In total, we interviewed 15 hematologists. Physicians expressed "cautious hope"; while expressing safety, feasibility, and screening criteria concerns, 14 out of 15 hematologists intended to screen for the trial (domains: knowledge, goals, beliefs about consequences, intentions). Physicians underscored the "challenging contexts," identifying resources, workload, forgetting, and patient wait times to receive CAR T cells as key practical barriers to screening (domains: environmental context and resources, memory, attention and decision-making, behavioral regulation). They also highlighted "variability in roles and procedures" that may lead to missed trial candidates (domain: social and professional role). Left unaddressed, these barriers may undermine trial recruitment.Conclusions: This study is among the first to use the Theoretical Domains Framework from the physician perspective to identify recruitment challenges to early phase trials and demonstrates the value of this approach for identifying barriers to screening and recruitment that may not otherwise have been elicited. This approach can optimize trial procedures and may serve to inform future promising early phase cancer therapy trials.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03765177 . Registered on December 5, 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite poor survival for patients with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma, only 10–16% of patients are reported to be included in early phase trials. This study aimed to explore the impact of molecular profiling within the prospective precision cancer medicine trial MAPPYACTS (NCT02613962) on subsequent early phase trial recruitment and treatment by matched targeted therapies in this population. Clinical data from all French patients with relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma enrolled in MAPPYACTS were analyzed for subsequent matched/non-matched targeted treatment based on clinical tumor board (CMTB) recommendations. From 93 patients with neuroblastoma included in French centers, 78 (84%) underwent whole exome and RNA sequencing and were discussed in the CMTB. Higher rate of successful sequencing analysis was observed in patients with relapsed disease compared to those with refractory disease (p = 0.0002). Among the 50 patients that presented with a new disease relapse/progression after the CMTB recommendations, 35 patients (70%) had at least one actionable alteration identified on the tumor at the time of relapse. Eighteen patients (36%) were included in an early phase clinical trial, 11 of these with a matched agent, 7 with a non-matched treatment; 13 patients were included in the AcSé ESMART trial. Five patients (10%) received a matched targeted therapy outside a clinical trial. Patients with neuroblastoma in the European MAPPYACTS trial were more likely to be included in early phase trials compared to previous reports. Early deep sequencing at first treatment failure, comprehensive therapeutic discussions in molecular tumor boards and innovative trials like AcSé -ESMART improve access to innovative therapies for patients with relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma. Clinical trial registration: NCT02613962 • Early phase trial inclusion is historically low in patients with relapse neuroblastoma • Recruitment can be facilitated by deep sequencing and multidisciplinary discussions • Molecular profiling at first relapse is recommended [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/aim: Early phase clinical trials (EPCTs) assess the tolerability of novel anti-cancer therapeutics in patients with advanced malignancy. Patient selection is important given the modest clinical benefit and time commitments for trials. Prognostic scores have been developed to facilitate identification of high-risk patients. This study aimed to compare five prognostic scores to predict survival for patients on an EPCT., Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients enrolled in EPCT at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, from 2013 to 2023. Demographic, biochemical, and survival data were collected from electronic medical records. The score from five prognostic scoring systems (Royal Marsden hospital, MD Anderson Cancer centre, Gustave Roussy Immune, MD Anderson Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor and Princess Margaret Hospital Index) were calculated. Overall survival was measured using the Kaplan-Meier method and predictive discrimination was assessed using Harrell's c-index., Results: A total of 218 patients across 36 EPCTs were included. The median overall survival was 9.8 months with 22% of patients dying in less than 90 days. Seventeen to thirty-four percent of patients were categorised as high-risk. The MDACC score obtained the highest predictability for overall survival for the whole cohort (c-index=0.67, 95%CI=0.62-0.72) and the immunotherapy-based cohort (c-index= 0.65, 95%CI=0.59-0.71). However, all scores performed similarly with a significant overlap in the confidence intervals., Conclusion: Our retrospective audit confirms the utility of prognostic scores to predict survival in an Australian EPCT cohort, with similar predictive discrimination across various scoring systems. Integration of these prognostic tools into EPCT screening processes may optimise benefits and reduce risks associated with EPCTs., (Copyright © 2024 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

In the shared decision-making (SDM) process for potential early phase clinical cancer trial participation, value clarification is highly recommended. However, exploration and discussion of patient values between patients and oncologists remains limited. This study aims to develop an SDM-supportive intervention, consisting of a preparatory online value clarification tool (OnVaCT) and a communication training. The OnVaCT intervention was developed and pilot-tested by combining theoretical notions on value clarification, with interview studies with patients and oncologists, focus groups with patient representatives and oncologists, and think aloud sessions with patients, following the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for complex interventions. These human-centered methodologies enabled a user-centered approach at every step of the development process of the intervention. This study shows relevant patient values and oncologists' perspectives on value exploration and discussion in daily practice. This has been combined with theoretical considerations into the creation of characters based on real-life experiences of patients in the OnVaCT, and how the tool is combined with a communication training for oncologists to improve SDM. • Successful designing value clarification tools (VCT) requires theory-practice integration. • VCT can never be neutral, explaining bias should be obligated. • Incorporating critical deliberation is required to be able to clarify personal values. • VCT for early phase clinical trials require physicians being critical counsellors. • VCT should contain the voice of the patient, e.g. through the use of personas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Randomization inference is a powerful tool in early phase vaccine trials when estimating the causal effect of a regimen against a placebo or another regimen. Randomization-based inference often focuses on testing either Fisher's sharp null hypothesis of no treatment effect for any participant or Neyman's weak null hypothesis of no sample average treatment effect. Many recent efforts have explored conducting exact randomization-based inference for other summaries of the treatment effect profile, for instance, quantiles of the treatment effect distribution function. In this article, we systematically review methods that conduct exact, randomization-based inference for quantiles of individual treatment effects (ITEs) and extend some results to a special case where naïve participants are expected not to exhibit responses to highly specific endpoints. These methods are suitable for completely randomized trials, stratified completely randomized trials, and a matched study comparing two non-randomized arms from possibly different trials. We evaluate the usefulness of these methods using synthetic data in simulation studies. Finally, we apply these methods to HIV Vaccine Trials Network Study 086 (HVTN 086) and HVTN 205 and showcase a wide range of application scenarios of the methods. R code that replicates all analyses in this article can be found in first author's GitHub page at https://github.com/Zhe-Chen-1999/ITE-Inference.

Background: Early phase cancer clinical trials (EPCTs) involve experimental drugs being used for the first time in humans. These studies are designed for dose determination and safety, and represent the most time intensive of all clinical trials for both clinicians and patients. We sought to quantify the amount of patient time consumed through EPCT participation., Patients and Methods: A retrospective audit of patients treated in the EPCT unit at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney was carried out from 2013 to 2023. We defined 'time toxicity' (TT) as a composite measure where time-toxic days were considered days with any health care system contact, including clinic visits, infusions, procedures or blood work., Results: A total of 219 patients across 36 EPCTs were included. The median age was 65 years (range 31-81 years). Patients spent a median of 29% (range 4%-100%) of their days in direct contact with the health care system during their study. Protocol-specified visits accounted for the greatest contribution to total TT in 101 (46%) patients. In 7% (n = 16) of patients, unscheduled visits due to either adverse events or cancer-related symptoms accounted for the greatest TT. TT reduced as patients completed additional cycles of treatment. Patients who completed >10 cycles spent 14% of their days interacting with health care systems compared with 35% for those who completed ≤2 cycles. No statistically significant difference in TT was noted between dose-expansion and dose-escalation studies or trials focusing on immune-oncology versus targeted therapy., Conclusions: Our study is the first to report TT in EPCTs with an extended follow-up. Clinicians should be aware of TT when discussing risks and benefits. TT also may not be the appropriate term when describing the time patients invest during EPCTs. Toxicity implies a negative impact, but for many patients, trial participation would be seen as positive. There should be efforts to streamline health care visits to limit TT in EPCTs., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Location of the primary tumor is prognostic and predictive of efficacy with VEGF-inhibitors (I) versus EGFR-I given first-line to metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. However, little is known regarding the effect of location on prognosis and prediction in refractory mCRC. We assessed the efficacy of VEGF-I and EGFR-I in regards to location of the primary tumor in patients with refractory mCRC enrolled in early phase studies.Methods: A historical cohort analysis of mCRC patients, including 44 phase I trials our institution, from March 2004 to September 2012. Median Progression free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS) were estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves and groups were statistically compared with the log-rank test.Results: One hundred thirty-nine patients with a median age 59 (33-81). 73.9% received 3+ lines of therapy. All KRAS wild-type patients had received prior EGFR-I. Location: right 20.9%, left 61.9%, and transverse 4.3%. For survival analysis, transverse CRC were included with right. Of the 112 patients, mOS was left (N = 80) 6.6 months versus right (N = 32) 5.9 months, P = 0.18. mPFS was left (n = 86) 2.0 months versus right (N = 35) 2.0 months, P = 0.76. In subgroup analysis, survival was significant for KRAS wild-type patients with left-sided mCRC had mOS of 6.2 months with other agents versus 9.4 months with EGFR-I (P = 0.03).Conclusions: In phase 1 clinical trials, although location alone was not prognostic in heavily pretreated patients, left-sided mCRC had improved survival with EGFR-I. Despite progression on EGFR-I, left-sided KRAS wild mCRC patients should be considered for phase 1 studies of agents targeting growth factor pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The process of anti-cancer drug development is complex, with high attrition rates. Factors that may optimise this process include well-constructed and relevant pre-clinical testing and use of biomarkers for patient selection. However, the design of early phase clinical trials will probably play a vital role in both the robust clinical investigation of new targeted therapies and in streamlining drug development. In this overview, we assess current concepts in phase I clinical trials, highlighting issues and opportunities to improve their meaningfulness. The particular challenge of how to design combination trials is addressed, with focus on the potential of new adaptive and model-based designs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This systematic review aims to better define the limitations and patterns with which patients with MBC and CNS metastasis are enrolled into early phase developmental therapeutics trials.Methods: In June 2016, PubMed search was conducted using the following keywords: "Breast cancer". Drug-development phase 1, phase 2 or phase 1/2 trials for patients with MBC were included. Multiple-histology trials and trials without an efficacy endpoint were excluded.Results: In total, 1474 studies were included; Inclusion criteria for 423 (29%) allowed for CNS metastasis, 770 (52%) either excluded or did not document eligibility of patients with CNS disease. Trials accruing patients with HER2-positive MBC and including targeted therapies had higher odds of allowing for patients with CNS disease (adjusted OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.08-2.2.6; p=0.019 and 1.49, 95% 1.08-2.06; p=0.014, respectively). There were also higher odds of accrual of patients with CNS involvement into clinical trials over time (odds ratio=1.10, 95% CI 1.07-1.12; p<0.0001).Conclusion: Most published early phase clinical trials either did not clearly document or did not allow for accrual of patients with CNS disease. Early phase trials with targeted agents or enrolling HER2+ MBC had higher odds of permitting CNS metastases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can be used to evaluate the impact of dry eye symptoms (DES) on daily life. Early-phase clinical trials provide an opportunity to evaluate PRO strategies. Existing measures identified through systematic review omitted important concepts that mattered to patients. The aim of our work was to develop a conceptual map of DES and assess the relative importance of identified concepts., Methods: Web-based group concept mapping software was used to develop a conceptual map. This semi-quantitative mixed-methods approach consists of three stages 1) statement generation, 2) thematic sorting, 3) rating of statements for importance [1 (not important), 2 (important), 3 (very important)] and relevance [1 (not my experience), 2 (sometimes my experience); 3 (definitely my experience)]. Thirty-nine participants were recruited from two UK-based patient support groups (British Sjögren's Syndrome Association, PemFriends). Three withdrew, two for health reasons and one struggled with the web-based format., Results: 125 statements and six thematic clusters were generated. The Environmental Impacts cluster scored highest for importance (2.45), followed by Pain and Discomfort (2.35), Eye Treatments (2.32), Daily Impact (2.07), Psychosocial Issues (1.78) and Miscellaneous (1.78). Mapping statements against existing PRO measures confirmed a number of important missing issues including the impact of 'UV levels' (2.50), hot dry weather (2.33), the temporal aspects of pain (2.64), and issues with night-driving (2.59)., Conclusions: Group concept mapping identified important issues for people living with DES not currently captured by existing PROs, highlighting the need for additional PRO items to be considered for use in clinical trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest O.L.A. declares personal fees from Gilead Sciences Ltd., GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Merck outside the submitted work. MC has received personal fees from Astellas, Aparito Ltd, CIS Oncology, Daiichi Sankyo, Glaukos, GSK, Halfloop, Merck, Takeda, and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Despite numerous advances, survival remains dismal for children and adolescents with poor prognosis cancers or those who relapse or are refractory to first line treatment. There is, therefore, a major unmet need for new drugs. Recent advances in the knowledge of molecular tumor biology open the door to more adapted therapies according to individual alterations. Promising results in the adult anticancer drug development have not yet been translated into clinical practice. We report the activity in early pediatric oncology trials in Spain. Methods: All members of the Spanish Society of Pediatric Hematology Oncology (SEHOP) were contacted to obtain information about early trials open in each center. Results: 22 phase I and II trials were open as of May 2015: 15 for solid tumors (68 %) and 7 for hematological malignancies (32 %). Fourteen (64 %) were industry sponsored. Since 2010, four centers have joined the Innovative Therapies For Children With Cancer, an international consortium whose aim is developing novel therapies for pediatric cancers. A substantial number of studies have opened in these 5 years, improving the portfolio of trials for children. Results of recently closed trials show the contribution of Spanish investigators, the introduction of molecularly targeted agents and their benefits. Conclusions: Clinical trials are the way to evaluate new drugs, avoiding the use of off-label drugs that carry significant risks. The Spanish pediatric oncology community through the SEHOP is committed to develop and participate in collaborative academic trials, to favor the advancement and optimization of existing therapies in pediatric cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] Three-dimensional (3D) printing is an emerging technology with great potential in pharmaceutical applications, providing innovative solutions for both patients and pharmaceutical industry. This technology offers precise construction of the structure of dosage forms and can benefit drug product design by providing versatile release modes to meet clinical needs and facilitating patient-centric treatment, such as personalized dosing, accommodate treatment of specific disease states or patient populations. Utilization of 3D printing also facilitates digital drug product development and manufacturing. Development of 3D printing at early clinical stages and commercial scale pharmaceutical manufacturing has substantially advanced in recent years. In this review, we discuss how 3D printing accelerates early-stage drug development, including pre-clinical research and early phase human studies, and facilitates late-stage product manufacturing as well as how the technology can benefit patients. The advantages, current status, and challenges of employing 3D printing in large scale manufacturing and personalized dosing are introduced respectively. The considerations and efforts of regulatory agencies to address 3D printing technology are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

All work referenced herein relates to treatment of epithelial ovarian carcinomas, as their treatment differs from ovarian germ cell cancers and other rare ovarian cancers, the treatments of which are addressed elsewhere. Fallopian tube cancers and primary peritoneal adenocarcinomatosis are also generally treated as epithelial ovarian cancers. The standard of care initial treatment of advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer is optimal debulking surgery as feasible plus chemotherapy with a platinum plus a taxane agent. If this front-line approach fails, as it too often the case, several FDA-approved agents are available for salvage therapy. However, because no second-line therapy for advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer is typically curative, we prefer referral to clinical trials as logistically feasible, even if it means referring patients outside our system. Immune therapy has a sound theoretical basis for treating carcinomas generally, and for treating ovarian cancer in particular. Advances in understanding the immunopathogenic basis of ovarian cancer, and the immunopathologic basis for prior failures of immunotherapy for it and other carcinomas promises to afford novel treatment approaches with potential for significant efficacy, and reduced toxicities compared with cytotoxic agents. Thus, referral to early phase immunotherapy trials for ovarian cancer patients that fail conventional treatment merits consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Purpose: The evaluation of treatment efficacy with RECIST criteria does not take into account tumour growth dynamics. We notably investigated the impact of the pre-treatment tumour growth rate (GR) on the evaluation of treatment response. Patients and methods: Seventy-six patients included in phase I clinical trials had scanographic evaluations before and after starting an experimental treatment. The GR was calculated for the pre-treatment period and for the experimental period (i.e. during the new treatment). Tumour response was evaluated per protocol at week 12 and at week 24 of the experimental period according to RECIST criteria. We studied the relation between pre-treatment and experimental GRs and RECIST tumour response. Results: On average the tumour GR was decreased by 40% during the experimental period; compared to the pretreatment period (p =0.03). An increased growth rate (acceleration of GR during experimental treatment compared to pretreatment) was observed in 20 (38%) of the 53 patients considered as non-progressive at week 12 according to RECIST. Conversely a decreased GR was observed in 12 out of 23 (53%) patients classified as progressive according to RECIST. The variation in the GR between the pre-treatment and experimental period was not significantly correlated with response evaluated according to RECIST at week 12 or at week 24 (p =0.45 and 0.44, respectively). Conclusions: RECIST evaluation of tumour response depends on the natural history of the tumours and poorly measures the impact of treatment on the kinetics of tumour growth. Integrating pre-treatment GR evaluations could substantially improve the assessment of treatment efficacy in drug development. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium (PBTC) is a multidisciplinary cooperative research organization devoted to the study of correlative tumor biology and new therapies for primary central nervous system (CNS) tumors of childhood. The PBTC was created in 1999 to conduct early-phase studies in a rapid fashion in order to provide sound scientific foundation for the Children's Oncology Group to conduct definitive trials. The Operations and Biostatistics Center (OBC) of the PBTC is responsible for centrally administering study design and trial development, study conduct and monitoring, data collection and management as well as various regulatory and compliance processes. The phase I designs utilized for the consortium trials have accommodated challenges unique to pediatric trials such as body surface area (BSA)-based dosing in the absence of pediatric formulations of oral agents. Further during the past decade, the OBC has developed and implemented a state-of-the-art secure and efficient internet-based paperless distributed data management system. Additional web-based systems are also in place for tracking and distributing correlative study data as well as neuroimaging files. These systems enable effective communications among the members of the consortium and facilitate the conduct and timely reporting of multi-institutional early-phase clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: We propose a new adaptive procedure for dose-finding in clinical trials with combination of two drugs when both efficacy and toxicity responses are available. We model the distribution of this bivariate binary endpoint using the bivariate probit model. The analytic formulae for the Fisher information matrix are obtained, that form the basis for derivation of the locally optimal, minimax, Bayesian, and adaptive designs in the framework of optimal design theory. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]