Dataset Information

Comparing duration of response and duration of clinical benefit between fulvestrant treatment groups in the CONFIRM trial: application of new methodology.

ABSTRACT: Comparisons of duration of response (DoR) and duration of clinical benefit (DoCB) within clinical trials are prone to biases. To address these biases, we used new methodology to prospectively analyze expected DoR and expected DoCB. Objective response rate and clinical benefit rate were calculated for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg, and used to calculate expected DoR and expected DoCB for each dose group. The ratios for expected DoR and expected DoCB (expected DoR500/expected DoR250 and expected DoCB500/expected DoCB250) were then calculated, thereby allowing statistical comparisons of these endpoints between each arm of the COmparisoN of Faslodex In Recurrent or Metastatic breast cancer (CONFIRM) trial. Expected DoRs for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg were 3.2 and 3.6 months, respectively. The expected DoR ratio between fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg was not statistically significant (0.89; 95 % CI, 0.48-1.67, P = 0.724). The expected DoCBs for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg were 9.8 and 7.2 months, respectively. The expected DoCB ratio showed that the expected DoCB for fulvestrant 500 mg was significantly improved compared with the expected DoCB for fulvestrant 250 mg (1.36; 95 % CI, 1.07-1.73, P = 0.013). Analysis of the expected DoR and expected DoCB showed fulvestrant 500 mg significantly increased expected DoCB compared with fulvestrant 250 mg in the CONFIRM trial.

SUBMITTER: Garnett SA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3586113 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing duration of response and duration of clinical benefit between fulvestrant treatment groups in the CONFIRM trial: application of new methodology.

Garnett Sally Anne SA Martin Miguel M Jerusalem Guy G Petruzelka Lubos L Torres Roberto R Bondarenko Igor N IN Khasanov Rustem R Verhoeven Didier D Pedrini José L JL Smirnova Iva I Lichinitser Mikhail R MR Pendergrass Kelly K Lindemann Justin P O JP Di Leo Angelo A

Breast cancer research and treatment 20130203 1

Comparisons of duration of response (DoR) and duration of clinical benefit (DoCB) within clinical trials are prone to biases. To address these biases, we used new methodology to prospectively analyze expected DoR and expected DoCB. Objective response rate and clinical benefit rate were calculated for fulvestrant 500 and 250 mg, and used to calculate expected DoR and expected DoCB for each dose group. The ratios for expected DoR and expected DoCB (expected DoR500/expected DoR250 and expected DoCB ...[more]

PMID: 23378064

Similar Datasets

Project description:The conventional battery for genotoxicity testing is not well suited to assessing the large number of chemicals needing evaluation. Traditional in vitro tests lack throughput, provide little mechanistic information, and have poor specificity in predicting in vivo genotoxicity. New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) aim to accelerate the pace of hazard assessment and reduce reliance on in vivo tests that are time-consuming and resource-intensive. As such, high-throughput transcriptomic and flow cytometry-based assays have been developed for modernized in vitro genotoxicity assessment. This includes: the TGx-DDI transcriptomic biomarker (i.e., 64-gene expression signature to identify DNA damage-inducing (DDI) substances), the MicroFlow® assay (i.e., a flow cytometry-based micronucleus (MN) test), and the MultiFlow® assay (i.e., a multiplexed flow cytometry-based reporter assay that yields mode-of-action (MoA) information). The objective of this study was to investigate the utility of the TGx-DDI transcriptomic biomarker, multiplexed with the MicroFlow® and MultiFlow® assays, as an integrated NAM-based testing strategy for screening data-poor compounds prioritized by Health Canada’s New Substances Assessment and Control Bureau. Human lymphoblastoid TK6 cells were exposed to 3 control and 10 data-poor substances, using a 6-point concentration range. Gene expression profiling was conducted using the targeted TempO-SeqTM assay, and the TGx-DDI classifier was applied to the dataset. Classifications were compared with those based on the MicroFlow® and MultiFlow® assays. Benchmark Concentration (BMC) modeling was used for potency ranking. The results of the integrated hazard calls indicate that five of the data-poor compounds were genotoxic in vitro, causing DNA damage via a clastogenic MoA, and one via a pan-genotoxic MoA. Two compounds were likely irrelevant positives in the MN test; two are considered possibly genotoxic causing DNA damage via an ambiguous MoA. BMC modeling revealed nearly identical potency rankings for each assay. This ranking was maintained when all endpoint BMCs were converted into a single score using the Toxicological Prioritization (ToxPi) approach. Overall, this study contributes to the establishment of a modernized approach for effective genotoxicity assessment and chemical prioritization for further regulatory scrutiny. We conclude that the integration of TGx-DDI, MicroFlow®, and MultiFlow® endpoints is an effective NAM-based strategy for genotoxicity assessment of data-poor compounds.

Project description:Potential therapy and confounding factors including typical co-administered medications, patient's disease states, disease prevalence, patient demographics, medical histories, and reasons for prescribing a drug often are incomplete, conflicting, missing, or uncharacterized in spontaneous adverse drug event (ADE) reporting systems. These missing or incomplete features can affect and limit the application of quantitative methods in pharmacovigilance for meta-analyses of data during randomized clinical trials. Data from patients with hypertension were retrieved and integrated from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System; 134 antihypertensive drugs out of 1131 drugs were filtered and then evaluated using the empirical Bayes geometric mean (EBGM) of the posterior distribution to build ADE-drug profiles with an emphasis on the pulmonary ADEs. Afterward, the graphical least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (GLASSO) captured drug associations based on pulmonary ADEs by correcting hidden factors and confounder misclassification. Selected drugs were then compared using the Friedman test in drug classes and clusters obtained from GLASSO. Following multiple filtering stages to exclude insignificant and noise-driven reports, we found that drugs from antihypertensives agents, urologicals, and antithrombotic agents (macitentan, bosentan, epoprostenol, selexipag, sildenafil, tadalafil, and beraprost) form a similar class with a significantly higher incidence of pulmonary ADEs. Macitentan and bosentan were associated with 64% and 56% of pulmonary ADEs, respectively. Because these two medications are prescribed in diseases affecting pulmonary function and may be likely to emerge among the highest reported pulmonary ADEs, in fact, they serve to validate the methods utilized here. Conversely, doxazosin and rilmenidine were found to have the least pulmonary ADEs in selected drugs from hypertension patients. Nifedipine and candesartan were also found by signal detection methods to form a drug cluster, shown by several studies an effective combination of these drugs on lowering blood pressure and appeared an improved side effect profile in comparison with single-agent monotherapy. We consider pulmonary ADE profiles in multiple long-standing groups of therapeutics including antihypertensive agents, antithrombotic agents, beta-blocking agents, calcium channel blockers, or agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system, in patients with hypertension associated with high risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We found that several individual drugs have significant differences between their drug classes and compared to other drug classes. For instance, macitentan and bosentan from endothelin receptor antagonists show major concern while doxazosin and rilmenidine exhibited the least pulmonary ADEs compared to the outcomes of other drugs. Using techniques in this study, we assessed and confirmed the hypothesis that drugs from the same drug class could have very different pulmonary ADE profiles affecting outcomes in acute respiratory illness. GJW and MJD accepted funding from BioNexus KC for funding on this project, but BioNexus KC had no direct role in this article.

Dataset Information

Comparing duration of response and duration of clinical benefit between fulvestrant treatment groups in the CONFIRM trial: application of new methodology.

Publications

Comparing duration of response and duration of clinical benefit between fulvestrant treatment groups in the CONFIRM trial: application of new methodology.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets