Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26926682›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2016

Case Example of Dose Optimization Using Data From Bortezomib Dose-Finding Clinical Trials.

Shing M Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, Dawn L Hershman, Diana Vulih, Barry Anderson, Percy Ivy, Lori Minasian

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Adaptive Phase 1 Design in Radiation Therapy Trials.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shing M LeeShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD. sml2114@columbia.edu.
Daniel BackenrothShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Ying Kuen Ken CheungShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Dawn L HershmanShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Diana VulihShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Barry AndersonShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Percy IvyShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Lori MinasianShing M. Lee, Daniel Backenroth, Ying Kuen Ken Cheung, and Dawn L. Hershman, Columbia University, New York, NY; Diana Vulih and Barry Anderson, Theradex Systems, Princeton, NJ; and Percy Ivy and Lori Minasian, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Theradex Oncology (United States) · USColumbia University · US

Funding

Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000040 · NCATS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GINSBERG, HENRY N · 2012 to 2015
$26.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000040
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe current dose-finding methodology for estimating the maximum tolerated dose of investigational anticancer agents is based on the cytotoxic chemotherapy paradigm. Molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) have different toxicity profiles, which may lead to more long-lasting mild or moderate toxicities as well as to late-onset and cumulative toxicities. Several approved MTAs have been poorly tolerated during long-term administration, leading to postmarketing dose optimization studies to re-evaluate the optimal treatment dose. Using data from completed bortezomib dose-finding trials, we explore its toxicity profile, optimize its dose, and examine the appropriateness of current designs for identifying an optimal dose. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe classified the toxicities captured from 481 patients in 14 bortezomib dose-finding studies conducted through the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, computed the incidence of late-onset toxicities, and compared the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) among groups of patients receiving different doses of bortezomib.

resultsA total of 13,008 toxicities were captured: 46% of patients' first DLTs and 88% of dose reductions or discontinuations of treatment because of toxicity were observed after the first cycle. Moreover, for the approved dose of 1.3 mg/m(2), the estimated cumulative incidence of DLT was > 50%, and the estimated cumulative incidence of dose reduction or treatment discontinuation because of toxicity was nearly 40%.

conclusionsWhen considering the entire course of treatment, the approved bortezomib dose exceeds the conventional ceiling DLT rate of 20% to 33%. Retrospective analysis of trial data provides an opportunity for dose optimization of MTAs. Future dose-finding studies of MTAs should take into account late-onset toxicities to ensure that a tolerable dose is identified for future efficacy and comparative trials.

Indexed as

Drug Dosage CalculationsResearch DesignAntineoplastic AgentsBortezomibClinical Trials as TopicDisease-Free SurvivalHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaximum Tolerated DoseMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasmsProportional Hazards ModelsProteasome InhibitorsRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAntineoplastic AgentsBortezomibProteasome Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID26926682
PMCPMC5070578
OpenAlexW2291909070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.