Incorporating biological questions in clinicalIncorporating biological questions in clinical cancer research: biomarkers and translational endpoints in clinical trials.p
Jorge Barriuso MD PhDTranslational Oncology and Oncology Phase I UnitO l D t tOncology DepartmentLa Paz University Hospital, IdiPAZ
1Jorge Barriuso
• What is a “biological question”?g q• Do we need to incorporate biological questions?q• What are the key concepts?• What are the needs?• How are we incorporating them?• New paradigm?p g• Conclusions
2Jorge Barriuso
What is a “biological question”?What is a biological question ?
3Jorge Barriuso
Do we need to incorporate biological questions?Do we need to incorporate biological questions?
Not all the patients are p
the same
Favorable response Increased toxicitypFavorable prognosis
Unfavorable responseUnfavorable prognosis
Increased toxicity
Burke 2004
4Jorge Barriuso
Burke 2004
Do we need to incorporate biological questions?Do we need to incorporate biological questions?
• Rising cost to bring new drugs to patients (~1500 million euros)• Long development times averaging 8 10 years• Long development times averaging 8-10 years• Only ~ 5% of agents in the clinical development succeedsucceed• Late stage failures due to lack of efficacy in oncology
• Up to 59% of phase III trials fail• Thousands of patients involved
Kola and Landis 2004
5Jorge Barriuso
Do we need to incorporate biological questions?Do we need to incorporate biological questions?
• Identification of the optimal biological dose• Some agents do not have MTD (monoclonal antibodies)antibodies)• Are we hitting the target at the MTD?• Are we looking at the right population?Are we looking at the right population?
• Identification of the right target tumor subpopulation• Optimized and reduced the time for drug p gdevelopment process.
• Early pick the winner strategies.
Baselga 2008
6Jorge Barriuso
Do we need to incorporate biological questions?Do we need to incorporate biological questions?
Up to the moment, using the old fashioned way of drug development….
“Are we learning too little too late from theAre we learning too little too late from the clinical trials we are designing?”
De Bono 2008
7Jorge Barriuso
What are the key concepts?What are the key concepts?
Biomarker A characteristic that is objectively measuredand evaluated as an indicator of normal biologicprocesses pathogenic processes orprocesses, pathogenic processes, or pharmacologic responses to a therapeuticintervention
Dancey 2010
8Jorge Barriuso
What are the key concepts?What are the key concepts?
P ti Any measurement that is associated PerformancePrognostic Any measurement that is associatedwith clinical outcome in the absence of therapy, or with a standard therapy that all patients are likely to receive (a predictor of the natural history of the
Performance status, OncotypeDx test
to receive (a predictor of the natural history of the tumor)
Predictive Any measurement associated withl k f t ti l
HER2 lifi ti dresponse or lack of response to a particular
therapy, where response can be defined using any of the clinical endpoints commonly used in clinical trials
amplification and effectiveness oftrastuzumab; KRAS m tationclinical trials. KRAS mutation and ineffectiveness of cetuximabof cetuximab
Dancey 20109Jorge Barriuso
What are the key concepts?What are the key concepts?
10Jorge Barriuso
Clark 2008
What are the key concepts?What are the key concepts?
11Jorge Barriuso
Clark 2008
What are the key concepts?What are the key concepts?
Ph d i P id id th t th i D l t dPharmacodynamic Provide evidence that there is a direct pharmacological effect of a drug
Drug-related toxicity, modulation of target proteinphosphorylation, alteration of vascularpermeability, tumor response
Surrogate Subsets of biomarkers that are Progression freeSurrogate Subsets of biomarkers that are intended to serveas a substitute for a clinically
i f l
Progression-free survival
meaningfulendpoint
D 2010Dancey 2010
12Jorge Barriuso
What are the needs?What are the needs?
• Biomarker or profile (multiple biomarkers)
Good biomarker
• Analytical validity• Method of measure
G d
Retrospective series
et od o easu evalidation
• Clinical validity
Good assay
Clinical validity•“fit for purpose”
•Clinical utilityGood
ProspectiveSeries
(clinical trials)•Clinical utilitytest
Dancey 201013Jorge Barriuso
What are the needs?What are the needs?
• Retrospective and prospective tissuep p p• Special collections (disease orientated, necropsy…)p y )• Good clinical information
Adapted from Wistuba 2010 14Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Proof of biology
Pharmacodynamicmarker
Phase 0Phase I
Selection Selection trials
Predictive and prognostick Phase II
Validation trials
markers Phase IIPhase III
trials
15Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Doroshow 2011Doroshow 2011
16Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Yap 2011 17Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Selection trials
Predictivemarkers
Phase IIPhase III
• Robust preclinical tested biomarker• Validated assay• Prevalence of the biomarker < 20-
• Not sure of biomarker• Assay not validated• Prevalence of the biomarker > 45-
30% 60%
18Jorge Barriuso
Sargent 2005Mandrekar 2011
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Screening for marker
Marker +
Treatment
19Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Smith 2007
20Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
New treatment
Marker ‐
Marker +
Randomization
Marker ‐
Standard or BSC
Marker ‐
Marker +
21Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Amado 2008Amado 2008
22Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Low risk
No intervention
Biomarker profile Intermediate risk Randomization
High risk
InterventionIntervention
23Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Cardoso 2008 24Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Control armStandard treatment
Randomization
Marker ‐Standard
Biomarker selection
Marker ‐treatment
S ifiMarker +
Specific treatment
25Jorge Barriuso
How are we incorporating them? (“the present”)How are we incorporating them? ( the present )
Cobo 2007 26Jorge Barriuso
New paradigm?New paradigm?
Kummar 200727Jorge Barriuso
New paradigm?New paradigm?
Possible outcomes
Drug Drug Control = orBetter Better
Control = orDrug
Better
Control = orControl orBetter
DrugBetter
Control orBetter
Active Active drugUseful marker
drugUseless marker
Useless drug
Dancey 2010Moreno García 2011 28Jorge Barriuso
ConclusionsConclusions
• Definitively need to incorporate biological questions• Costs• Thousands of patients not getting our bestp g g
• Select the design taking into account the previous knowledge• Less knowledge in early phases ≈ more technicalLess knowledge in early phases more technical difficulties in late phases = more costs and more chances of failure
• Shifting the paradigm More biological knowledge gain in early phases =• More biological knowledge gain in early phases =
more chances of success with less number of patients involved and lower costs.
29Jorge Barriuso
Top Related