肿瘤学 I 期临床试验设计:2020 年至 2022 年系统性文献综述。

IF 2.1 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Pub Date : 2024-09-24 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1017/cts.2024.599
Ning Li, Xitong Zhou, Donglin Yan
{"title":"肿瘤学 I 期临床试验设计:2020 年至 2022 年系统性文献综述。","authors":"Ning Li, Xitong Zhou, Donglin Yan","doi":"10.1017/cts.2024.599","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Phase I clinical trials aim to find the highest dose of a novel drug that may be administrated safely without having serious adverse effects. Model-based designs have recently become popular in dose-finding procedures. Our objective is to provide an overview of phase I clinical trials in oncology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of phase I clinical trials in oncology was performed by using the PubMed database between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2022. We extracted all papers with the inclusion of trials in oncology and kept only those in which dose escalation or/ and dose expansion were conducted. We also compared the study parameters, design parameters, and patient parameters between industry-sponsored studies and academia-sponsored research.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Among the 1450 papers retrieved, 256 trials described phase I clinical trials in oncology. Overall, 71.1% of trials were done with a single study cohort, 56.64% of trials collected a group of at least 20 study volunteers, 55.1% were sponsored by industry, and 99.2% of trials had less than 10 patients who experienced DLTs.The traditional 3 + 3 (73.85%) was still the most prevailing method for the dose-escalation approach. More than 50% of the trials did not reach MTDs. Industry-sponsored study enrolled more patients in dose-escalation trials with benefits of continental cooperation. Compared to previous findings, the usage of model-based design increased to about 10%, and the percentage of traditional 3 + 3 design decreased to 74%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Phase I traditional 3 + 3 designs perform well, but there is still room for development in novel model-based dose-escalation designs in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"8 1","pages":"e134"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11428115/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Phase I clinical trial designs in oncology: A systematic literature review from 2020 to 2022.\",\"authors\":\"Ning Li, Xitong Zhou, Donglin Yan\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cts.2024.599\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Phase I clinical trials aim to find the highest dose of a novel drug that may be administrated safely without having serious adverse effects. Model-based designs have recently become popular in dose-finding procedures. Our objective is to provide an overview of phase I clinical trials in oncology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of phase I clinical trials in oncology was performed by using the PubMed database between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2022. We extracted all papers with the inclusion of trials in oncology and kept only those in which dose escalation or/ and dose expansion were conducted. We also compared the study parameters, design parameters, and patient parameters between industry-sponsored studies and academia-sponsored research.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Among the 1450 papers retrieved, 256 trials described phase I clinical trials in oncology. Overall, 71.1% of trials were done with a single study cohort, 56.64% of trials collected a group of at least 20 study volunteers, 55.1% were sponsored by industry, and 99.2% of trials had less than 10 patients who experienced DLTs.The traditional 3 + 3 (73.85%) was still the most prevailing method for the dose-escalation approach. More than 50% of the trials did not reach MTDs. Industry-sponsored study enrolled more patients in dose-escalation trials with benefits of continental cooperation. Compared to previous findings, the usage of model-based design increased to about 10%, and the percentage of traditional 3 + 3 design decreased to 74%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Phase I traditional 3 + 3 designs perform well, but there is still room for development in novel model-based dose-escalation designs in clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"e134\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11428115/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.599\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.599","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:I 期临床试验的目的是找到一种新药的最高剂量,使其能够在不产生严重不良反应的情况下安全给药。基于模型的设计近来在剂量寻找程序中很受欢迎。我们的目的是概述肿瘤学 I 期临床试验:方法:我们使用 PubMed 数据库对 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 12 月 31 日期间的肿瘤学 I 期临床试验进行了回顾性分析。我们提取了所有纳入肿瘤学试验的论文,仅保留了进行剂量升级或/和剂量扩增的论文。我们还比较了工业界资助的研究与学术界资助的研究之间的研究参数、设计参数和患者参数:在检索到的 1450 篇论文中,有 256 项试验描述了肿瘤学的 I 期临床试验。总体而言,71.1%的试验采用单一研究队列,56.64%的试验收集了至少20名研究志愿者,55.1%的试验由企业赞助,99.2%的试验中出现DLT的患者少于10人。超过 50% 的试验未达到 MTD。行业赞助的研究在剂量递增试验中招募了更多患者,这有利于大陆的合作。与之前的研究结果相比,基于模型的设计的使用率增加到约 10%,而传统 3 + 3 设计的使用率下降到 74%:结论:I期传统3+3设计表现良好,但基于模型的新型剂量递增设计在临床实践中仍有发展空间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Phase I clinical trial designs in oncology: A systematic literature review from 2020 to 2022.

Background: Phase I clinical trials aim to find the highest dose of a novel drug that may be administrated safely without having serious adverse effects. Model-based designs have recently become popular in dose-finding procedures. Our objective is to provide an overview of phase I clinical trials in oncology.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of phase I clinical trials in oncology was performed by using the PubMed database between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2022. We extracted all papers with the inclusion of trials in oncology and kept only those in which dose escalation or/ and dose expansion were conducted. We also compared the study parameters, design parameters, and patient parameters between industry-sponsored studies and academia-sponsored research.

Result: Among the 1450 papers retrieved, 256 trials described phase I clinical trials in oncology. Overall, 71.1% of trials were done with a single study cohort, 56.64% of trials collected a group of at least 20 study volunteers, 55.1% were sponsored by industry, and 99.2% of trials had less than 10 patients who experienced DLTs.The traditional 3 + 3 (73.85%) was still the most prevailing method for the dose-escalation approach. More than 50% of the trials did not reach MTDs. Industry-sponsored study enrolled more patients in dose-escalation trials with benefits of continental cooperation. Compared to previous findings, the usage of model-based design increased to about 10%, and the percentage of traditional 3 + 3 design decreased to 74%.

Conclusions: Phase I traditional 3 + 3 designs perform well, but there is still room for development in novel model-based dose-escalation designs in clinical practice.

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
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
26.90%
发文量
437
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信