Jade M van Berge Henegouwen, Laurien J Zeverijn, Birgit S Geurts, Louisa R Hoes, Hanneke van der Wijngaart, Vincent van der Noort, Alwin D R Huitema, Filip Y F de Vos, Katrien Grünberg, Haiko J Bloemendal, Henk M W Verheul, Emile E Voest, Hans Gelderblom
{"title":"最大化治疗机会:评估协议豁免对药物再发现协议的安全性和结果的影响。","authors":"Jade M van Berge Henegouwen, Laurien J Zeverijn, Birgit S Geurts, Louisa R Hoes, Hanneke van der Wijngaart, Vincent van der Noort, Alwin D R Huitema, Filip Y F de Vos, Katrien Grünberg, Haiko J Bloemendal, Henk M W Verheul, Emile E Voest, Hans Gelderblom","doi":"10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-23-3917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although eligibility criteria are essential in trial design, overly restrictive criteria contribute to low accrual and limited generalizability. To enhance trial inclusivity, there has been growing interest in broadening eligibility criteria, especially for patients with advanced or treatment-refractory disease. Yet, the impact on patient safety remains uncertain. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), protocol exceptions are frequently requested and occasionally granted. Here we describe the impact of these waivers on treatment safety and efficacy.</p><p><strong>Experimental design: </strong>DRUP is a multicenter, nonrandomized clinical basket trial treating patients with therapy-refractory cancer with molecularly targeted and immunotherapies outside their registered indications (NCT02925234). Here, all granted waivers were revised, analyzed in terms of safety and efficacy outcome, and comparedwithoutcomes of includedpatientswho didnot receive awaiver.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between September 1, 2016, and September 1, 2021, protocol waivers were granted for 82 patients (8%) of 1,019 included patients in DRUP. Most waivers (45%) were granted for general- or drug-related eligibility criteria; other categories were out-of-window testing, treatment, and testing exceptions. Serious adverse event rate was similar between patients who received a waiver (pW) and patients who did not (pNW): 39% vs. 41%, respectively (P = 0.81). The clinical benefit (either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks) rate of pW was 40% versus 33% in pNW (P = 0.43).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Safety and clinical benefit were preserved in patients for whom a waiver was granted. These data support a more personalized approach in assessing eligibility criteria, especially in trials with widely used and approved drugs accruing patients without other treatment options. See related commentary by Waqar and Govindan, p. 3655.</p>","PeriodicalId":10279,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Cancer Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maximizing Treatment Opportunities: Assessing Protocol Waivers' Impact on Safety and Outcome in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.\",\"authors\":\"Jade M van Berge Henegouwen, Laurien J Zeverijn, Birgit S Geurts, Louisa R Hoes, Hanneke van der Wijngaart, Vincent van der Noort, Alwin D R Huitema, Filip Y F de Vos, Katrien Grünberg, Haiko J Bloemendal, Henk M W Verheul, Emile E Voest, Hans Gelderblom\",\"doi\":\"10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-23-3917\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although eligibility criteria are essential in trial design, overly restrictive criteria contribute to low accrual and limited generalizability. To enhance trial inclusivity, there has been growing interest in broadening eligibility criteria, especially for patients with advanced or treatment-refractory disease. Yet, the impact on patient safety remains uncertain. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), protocol exceptions are frequently requested and occasionally granted. Here we describe the impact of these waivers on treatment safety and efficacy.</p><p><strong>Experimental design: </strong>DRUP is a multicenter, nonrandomized clinical basket trial treating patients with therapy-refractory cancer with molecularly targeted and immunotherapies outside their registered indications (NCT02925234). Here, all granted waivers were revised, analyzed in terms of safety and efficacy outcome, and comparedwithoutcomes of includedpatientswho didnot receive awaiver.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between September 1, 2016, and September 1, 2021, protocol waivers were granted for 82 patients (8%) of 1,019 included patients in DRUP. Most waivers (45%) were granted for general- or drug-related eligibility criteria; other categories were out-of-window testing, treatment, and testing exceptions. Serious adverse event rate was similar between patients who received a waiver (pW) and patients who did not (pNW): 39% vs. 41%, respectively (P = 0.81). The clinical benefit (either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks) rate of pW was 40% versus 33% in pNW (P = 0.43).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Safety and clinical benefit were preserved in patients for whom a waiver was granted. These data support a more personalized approach in assessing eligibility criteria, especially in trials with widely used and approved drugs accruing patients without other treatment options. See related commentary by Waqar and Govindan, p. 3655.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Cancer Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Cancer Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-23-3917\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Cancer Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-23-3917","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Maximizing Treatment Opportunities: Assessing Protocol Waivers' Impact on Safety and Outcome in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.
Purpose: Although eligibility criteria are essential in trial design, overly restrictive criteria contribute to low accrual and limited generalizability. To enhance trial inclusivity, there has been growing interest in broadening eligibility criteria, especially for patients with advanced or treatment-refractory disease. Yet, the impact on patient safety remains uncertain. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), protocol exceptions are frequently requested and occasionally granted. Here we describe the impact of these waivers on treatment safety and efficacy.
Experimental design: DRUP is a multicenter, nonrandomized clinical basket trial treating patients with therapy-refractory cancer with molecularly targeted and immunotherapies outside their registered indications (NCT02925234). Here, all granted waivers were revised, analyzed in terms of safety and efficacy outcome, and comparedwithoutcomes of includedpatientswho didnot receive awaiver.
Results: Between September 1, 2016, and September 1, 2021, protocol waivers were granted for 82 patients (8%) of 1,019 included patients in DRUP. Most waivers (45%) were granted for general- or drug-related eligibility criteria; other categories were out-of-window testing, treatment, and testing exceptions. Serious adverse event rate was similar between patients who received a waiver (pW) and patients who did not (pNW): 39% vs. 41%, respectively (P = 0.81). The clinical benefit (either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks) rate of pW was 40% versus 33% in pNW (P = 0.43).
Conclusions: Safety and clinical benefit were preserved in patients for whom a waiver was granted. These data support a more personalized approach in assessing eligibility criteria, especially in trials with widely used and approved drugs accruing patients without other treatment options. See related commentary by Waqar and Govindan, p. 3655.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Cancer Research is a journal focusing on groundbreaking research in cancer, specifically in the areas where the laboratory and the clinic intersect. Our primary interest lies in clinical trials that investigate novel treatments, accompanied by research on pharmacology, molecular alterations, and biomarkers that can predict response or resistance to these treatments. Furthermore, we prioritize laboratory and animal studies that explore new drugs and targeted agents with the potential to advance to clinical trials. We also encourage research on targetable mechanisms of cancer development, progression, and metastasis.