M.A. Gouda , P.A. Ballesteros , I. Garrido-Laguna , J. Rodon
{"title":"I期临床试验的疗效评估:终点和挑战。","authors":"M.A. Gouda , P.A. Ballesteros , I. Garrido-Laguna , J. Rodon","doi":"10.1016/j.annonc.2025.02.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The scope of phase I clinical trials in oncology goes beyond the conventional safety evaluation-only objectives of these trials in other specialties. Rather, most first-in-human oncology clinical trials have therapeutic intent, and efficacy signals observed in phase I trials can drive a go/no-go decision of advancing a new molecule to phase II testing. The complexity of efficacy assessment in the context of a small, heterogeneous patient population and a complex study design requires a more liberal perspective compared with later trial phases when looking into efficacy endpoints. Classically, in later-phase clinical trials, these endpoints would include the objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. However, new, evolving endpoints may be worth investigating when looking into the antitumor activity signals in phase I trials. Integration of all these endpoints into trial designs can improve the assessment of therapeutic efficacy during early drug development and guide decisions related to the further advancement of novel molecules into later phases. In this review, we discuss the advantages and pitfalls of different classic efficacy endpoints when evaluated as part of phase I trials in oncology and describe how challenges in assessing the antitumor activity of new drugs can be overcome through the incorporation of novel endpoints that have thus far proven successful in clinical trials.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8000,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Oncology","volume":"36 5","pages":"Pages 507-519"},"PeriodicalIF":56.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy assessment in phase I clinical trials: endpoints and challenges\",\"authors\":\"M.A. Gouda , P.A. Ballesteros , I. Garrido-Laguna , J. Rodon\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.annonc.2025.02.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The scope of phase I clinical trials in oncology goes beyond the conventional safety evaluation-only objectives of these trials in other specialties. Rather, most first-in-human oncology clinical trials have therapeutic intent, and efficacy signals observed in phase I trials can drive a go/no-go decision of advancing a new molecule to phase II testing. The complexity of efficacy assessment in the context of a small, heterogeneous patient population and a complex study design requires a more liberal perspective compared with later trial phases when looking into efficacy endpoints. Classically, in later-phase clinical trials, these endpoints would include the objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. However, new, evolving endpoints may be worth investigating when looking into the antitumor activity signals in phase I trials. Integration of all these endpoints into trial designs can improve the assessment of therapeutic efficacy during early drug development and guide decisions related to the further advancement of novel molecules into later phases. In this review, we discuss the advantages and pitfalls of different classic efficacy endpoints when evaluated as part of phase I trials in oncology and describe how challenges in assessing the antitumor activity of new drugs can be overcome through the incorporation of novel endpoints that have thus far proven successful in clinical trials.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Oncology\",\"volume\":\"36 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 507-519\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":56.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092375342500081X\",\"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":"Annals of Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092375342500081X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy assessment in phase I clinical trials: endpoints and challenges
The scope of phase I clinical trials in oncology goes beyond the conventional safety evaluation-only objectives of these trials in other specialties. Rather, most first-in-human oncology clinical trials have therapeutic intent, and efficacy signals observed in phase I trials can drive a go/no-go decision of advancing a new molecule to phase II testing. The complexity of efficacy assessment in the context of a small, heterogeneous patient population and a complex study design requires a more liberal perspective compared with later trial phases when looking into efficacy endpoints. Classically, in later-phase clinical trials, these endpoints would include the objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. However, new, evolving endpoints may be worth investigating when looking into the antitumor activity signals in phase I trials. Integration of all these endpoints into trial designs can improve the assessment of therapeutic efficacy during early drug development and guide decisions related to the further advancement of novel molecules into later phases. In this review, we discuss the advantages and pitfalls of different classic efficacy endpoints when evaluated as part of phase I trials in oncology and describe how challenges in assessing the antitumor activity of new drugs can be overcome through the incorporation of novel endpoints that have thus far proven successful in clinical trials.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Oncology, the official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology and the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology, offers rapid and efficient peer-reviewed publications on innovative cancer treatments and translational research in oncology and precision medicine.
The journal primarily focuses on areas such as systemic anticancer therapy, with a specific emphasis on molecular targeted agents and new immune therapies. We also welcome randomized trials, including negative results, as well as top-level guidelines. Additionally, we encourage submissions in emerging fields that are crucial to personalized medicine, such as molecular pathology, bioinformatics, modern statistics, and biotechnologies. Manuscripts related to radiotherapy, surgery, and pediatrics will be considered if they demonstrate a clear interaction with any of the aforementioned fields or if they present groundbreaking findings.
Our international editorial board comprises renowned experts who are leaders in their respective fields. Through Annals of Oncology, we strive to provide the most effective communication on the dynamic and ever-evolving global oncology landscape.