Skip Navigation

Annals of Oncology 2006 17(Supplement 7):vii128-vii131; doi:10.1093/annonc/mdl965
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morabito, A.
Right arrow Articles by Perrone, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Morabito, A.
Right arrow Articles by Perrone, F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2006 European Society for Medical Oncology

symposium article

Methodology of clinical trials with new molecular-targeted agents: where do we stand?

A. Morabito1, M. Di Maio1, E. De Maio1, N. Normanno2 and F. Perrone1,*

1 Clinical Trials Unit; 2 Cellular Biology and Preclinical Models, National Cancer Institute, Napoli, Italy

* Correspondence to: Dr F. Perrone, Director Clinical Trials Unit, National Cancer Institute, Via Mariano Semmola, 80131 Naples, Italy. Fax: +39-0817702938; E-mail: francesco.perrone{at}uosc.fondazionepascale.it

In recent years, we have witnessed growing interest in the methodology of clinical trials with molecular-targeted agents. In phase I studies, alternative end points to toxicity have been proposed to define the optimal biological dose: the identification of a ‘target effect’, the measurement of ‘surrogates’ for biological activity and the assessment of drug plasma levels. However, these end points are not routinely incorporated into the study design and have rarely formed the primary basis for dose selection. In phase II studies, response rate remains the preferred end point in the early evaluation of new drugs. However, this approach might lead to rejection of potentially useful drugs when significant tumor shrinkage cannot be demonstrated. Therefore, a number of alternative end points have been proposed for agents that are not expected to cause a major tumor regression: time to progression, progression-free survival, overall survival, early progression rate and growth modulation index. In phase III trials, where efficacy in terms of survival remains the most important goal of the research, the major issues are the adequate selection of patients and the optimal clinical setting of evaluation of drugs. In conclusion, many important questions regarding the methodology of clinical research with target-based agents remain open and need to be defined by research in the near future.

Key words: targeted therapy, clinical trials, methodology


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.