Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35965268›Full record

ReviewCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2022

Oncology dose optimization paradigms: knowledge gained and extrapolated from approved oncology therapeutics.

Rajendar K Mittapalli, Cen Guo, Stefanie K Drescher, Donghua Yin

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

4 authors.

Rajendar K MittapalliClinical Pharmacology, Early Clinical Development, Pfizer Inc., 10777 Science Center Drive, San Diego, CA, 92121, USA. rajendar.mittapalli@pfizer.com.ORCID 0000-0001-7738-4039
Cen GuoClinical Pharmacology, Early Clinical Development, Pfizer Inc., 10777 Science Center Drive, San Diego, CA, 92121, USA.
Stefanie K DrescherClinical Pharmacology, Early Clinical Development, Pfizer Inc., 10777 Science Center Drive, San Diego, CA, 92121, USA.
Donghua YinClinical Pharmacology, Early Clinical Development, Pfizer Inc., 10777 Science Center Drive, San Diego, CA, 92121, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been increasing attention to dose optimization in the development of targeted oncology therapeutics. The current report has analyzed the dose selection approaches for 116 new molecular entities (NMEs) approved for oncology indications by the US FDA from 2010 to August 2021, with the goal to extract learnings about the ways to select the optimal dose. The analysis showed that: (1) the initial label dose was lower than the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or maximum studied dose (MSD) in Phase 1 for the majority of approved NMEs, and that the MTD approach is no longer the mainstay for dose selection; (2) there was no dose ranging or optimization beyond Phase 1 dose escalation for ~ 80% of the NMEs; (3) integrated dose/exposure-response analyses were commonly used to justify the dose selection; (4) lack of dose optimization led to dose-related PMRs/PMCs in 14% of cases, but 82% of these did not result in change of the initial label dose; and (5) depending on properties of the NME and specific benefit/risk considerations for the target patient population, there could be different dose selection paradigms leading to identification of the appropriate clinical dose. The analysis supports the need to incorporate more robust dose optimization during oncology clinical development, through comparative assessment of benefit/risk of multiple dose levels, over a wide exposure range using therapeutically relevant endpoints and adequate sample size. On the other hand, in certain cases, data from FIP dose escalation may be adequate to support the dose selection.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsNeoplasmsDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansMaximum Tolerated DoseMolecular Targeted TherapyRisk AssessmentUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAntineoplastic AgentsDose selectionMaximum tolerated doseOncologyOptimal doseRecommended phase 2 dose

Identifiers

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.