Dataset Information

Characteristics of drug combination therapy in oncology by analyzing clinical trial data on ClinicalTrials.gov.

ABSTRACT: Within the past few decades, drug combination therapy has been intensively studied in oncology and other complex disease areas, especially during the early drug discovery stage, as drug combinations have the potential to improve treatment response, minimize development of resistance or minimize adverse events. In the present, designing combination trials relies mainly on clinical and empirical experience. While empirical experience has indeed crafted efficacious combination therapy clinical trials (combination trials), however, garnering experience with patients can take a lifetime. The preliminary step to eliminating this barrier of time, then, is to understand the current state of combination trials. Thus, we present the first large-scale study of clinical trials (2008-2013) from ClinicalTrials.gov to compare combination trials to non-combination trials, with a focus on oncology. In this work, we developed a classifier to identify combination trials and oncology trials through natural language processing techniques. After clustering trials, we categorized them based on selected characteristics and observed trends present. Among the characteristics studied were primary purpose, funding source, endpoint measurement, allocation, and trial phase. We observe a higher prevalence of combination therapy in oncology (25.6% use combination trials) in comparison to other disease trials (6.9%). However, surprisingly the prevalence of combinations does not increase over the years. In addition, the trials supported by the NIH are significantly more likely to use combinations of drugs than those supported by industry. Our preliminary study of current combination trials may facilitate future trial design and move more preclinical combination studies to the clinical trial stage.

SUBMITTER: Wu M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4361221 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Characteristics of drug combination therapy in oncology by analyzing clinical trial data on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Wu Menghua M Sirota Marina M Butte Atul J AJ Chen Bin B

Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 20150101

Within the past few decades, drug combination therapy has been intensively studied in oncology and other complex disease areas, especially during the early drug discovery stage, as drug combinations have the potential to improve treatment response, minimize development of resistance or minimize adverse events. In the present, designing combination trials relies mainly on clinical and empirical experience. While empirical experience has indeed crafted efficacious combination therapy clinical tria ...[more]

PMID: 25592569

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the distribution, design characteristics, and dissemination of clinical trials by funding organisation and medical specialty. DESIGN:Cross sectional descriptive analysis. DATA SOURCES:Trial protocol information from clinicaltrials.gov, metadata of journal articles in which trial results were published (PubMed), and quality metrics of associated journals from SCImago Journal and Country Rank database. SELECTION CRITERIA:All 45?620 clinical trials evaluating small molecule therapeutics, biological drugs, adjuvants, and vaccines, completed after January 2006 and before July 2015, including randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies across all clinical phases. RESULTS:Industry was more likely than non-profit funders to fund large international randomised controlled trials, although methodological differences have been decreasing with time. Among 27?835 completed efficacy trials (phase II-IV), 15?084 (54.2%) had disclosed their findings publicly. Industry was more likely than non-profit trial funders to disseminate trial results (59.3% (10?444/17?627) v 45.3% (4555/10?066)), and large drug companies had higher disclosure rates than small ones (66.7% (7681/11?508) v 45.2% (2763/6119)). Trials funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were disseminated more often than those of other non-profit institutions (60.0% (1451/2417) v 40.6% (3104/7649)). Results of studies funded by large drug companies and NIH were more likely to appear on clinicaltrials.gov than were those from non-profit funders, which were published mainly as journal articles. Trials reporting the use of randomisation were more likely than non-randomised studies to be published in a journal article (6895/19?711 (34.9%) v 1408/7748 (18.2%)), and journal publication rates varied across disease areas, ranging from 42% for autoimmune diseases to 20% for oncology. CONCLUSIONS:Trial design and dissemination of results vary substantially depending on the type and size of funding institution as well as the disease area under study.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Germline and tumor pharmacogenomics impact drug responses, but germline markers less commonly guide oncology prescribing. The authors hypothesized that a critical number of clinically actionable germline pharmacogenomic associations exist, representing clinical implementation opportunities. METHODS:In total, 125 oncology drugs were analyzed for positive germline pharmacogenomic associations in journals with impact factors ?5. Studies were assessed for design and genotyping quality, clinically relevant outcomes, statistical rigor, and evidence of drug-gene effects. Associations from studies of high methodologic quality were deemed potentially clinically actionable, and translational summaries were written as point-of-care clinical decision support (CDS) tools and formally evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. RESULTS:The authors identified germline pharmacogenomic results for 56 of 125 oncology drugs (45%) across 173 publications. Actionable associations were detected for 12 drugs, including 6 that had germline pharmacogenomic information within US Food and Drug Administration labels or published guidelines (capecitabine/fluorouracil/dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase [DPYD], irinotecan/uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 [UGT1A1], mercaptopurine/thioguanine/thiopurine S-methyltransferase [TPMT], tamoxifen/cytochrome P450 [CYP] family 2 subfamily D member 6 [CYP2D6]), and 6 others were novel (asparaginase/nuclear factor of activated T-cells 2 [NFATC2]/human leukocyte antigen D-related ?1 [HLA-DRB1], cisplatin/acylphosphatase 2 [ACYP2], doxorubicin/adenosine triphosphate-binding cassette subfamily C member 2/Rac family small guanosine triphosphatase 2/neutrophil cytosolic factor 4 [ABCC2/RAC2/NCF4], lapatinib/human leukocyte antigen DQ ?1 [HLA-DQA1], sunitinib/cytochrome P450 family 3 subfamily A member 5 [CYP3A5], vincristine/centrosomal protein 72 [CEP72]). By using AGREE II, the developed CDS summaries had high mean?±?standard deviation scores (maximum score, 100) for scope and purpose (92.7?±?5.1) and rigour of development (87.6?±?7.4) and moderate yet robust scores for clarity of presentation (58.6?±?25.1) and applicability (55.9?±?24.6). The overall mean guideline quality score was 5.2?±?1.0 (maximum score, 7). Germline pharmacogenomic CDS summaries for these 12 drugs were recommended for implementation. CONCLUSIONS:Several oncology drugs have actionable germline pharmacogenomic information, justifying their delivery through institutional pharmacogenomic implementations to determine clinical utility. Cancer 2018;124:3052-65. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about how physicians interpret data displays that depict preliminary or exploratory clinical data in physician-targeted sales aids for oncology drugs. Using three factorial experiments, we examined whether disclosures of data limitations and clinical uncertainty adequately communicate the limitations and practical utility of this type of data.Subjects, materials, and methodsThe studies used a 2 (disclosure of data limitations: technical, nontechnical) × 2 (disclosure of clinical uncertainty: present, absent) + 1 (control: no disclosure) between-subjects experimental design to examine the impact of disclosures as they relate to presentations of preliminary or exploratory data in promotional communications for oncology products. In each experiment, we randomized oncologists and primary care physicians with oncology experience to view one version of a two-page sales aid. Following this exposure, physicians completed a web-based survey. The design was replicated in three concurrently conducted experiments using sales aids for different fictitious oncology drugs, each featuring one of three common data displays: a forest plot (n = 495), a Kaplan-Meier curve (n = 504), or a bar chart (n = 532).ResultsResults provide initial evidence that in some contexts disclosures can improve understanding of the clinical utility of certain information about a drug and the limitations of results presented in a data display. Disclosures can also temper perceptions of how much evidence is presented that supports a conclusion that the drug is an appropriate treatment. In terms of the language used in the disclosure of data limitations, physicians in all three experiments strongly preferred the nontechnical disclosures.ConclusionThe findings from the three experiments in this study suggest that disclosures have the potential to increase relevant knowledge, but more research is needed to establish best practice recommendations for using disclosures to convey contextual information relevant for interpreting data displays in promotional communications.Implications for practiceThis article reports the results from three large, online experimental studies that address a growing concern that drug companies often share favorable clinical trial results with physicians in promotional materials that lack important context for physicians to interpret the data. This series of studies investigates whether strategic use of two types of disclosures (disclosure of data limitations and a disclosure of clinical uncertainty) improves understanding and reduces misinterpretations among physicians. The results from these studies help identify communication factors that impact how physicians critically appraise preliminary or exploratory clinical trial data to inform policy and regulatory efforts.

Dataset Information

Characteristics of drug combination therapy in oncology by analyzing clinical trial data on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Publications

Characteristics of drug combination therapy in oncology by analyzing clinical trial data on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure