Article

Lessons learned from the investigational device exemption review of Children's Oncology Group trial AAML1031.

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Clinical Cancer Research (Impact Factor: 7.84). 03/2012; 18(6):1547-54. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2205
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is now exerting its regulatory authority over the use of molecular diagnostics and related assays for medical decision making in clinical trials, by performing pre-Investigational Device Exemption reviews in all phases of clinical trials. In this review, we assess the analytical performance of the assay for the diagnostic, and consider how that performance affects the diagnostic and the patient and their risks and benefits from treatment. We also discuss the process involved in the first review of a new Children's Oncology Group phase III trial in acute myelogenous leukemia. The lessons learned and recommendations for how to prepare for and incorporate this new level of regulatory review into the protocol development process are presented.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
236 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Clinical trials that include integral biomarkers to determine eligibility, assign treatment, or assess outcome must employ robust assays to measure the molecular analyte of interest. The decision to develop a biomarker assay into a test suitable for use in humans should be driven by clinical need, that is, there should be a clear clinical purpose for undertaking the test development. Supporting in vitro or in vivo research on the ability of the marker to distinguish subgroups of patients with a given characteristic is necessary. The magnitude of the difference in treatment effect expected with use of the marker should be sufficient to support differential treatment prescription for marker-positive and -negative patients. Analytical and clinical validation of the marker assay should be completed before the clinical trial is initiated to ensure that the assay is stable enough for clinical use throughout the trial. Clinical use of the assay requires that it be performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-accredited laboratory, and the need to apply for an Investigational Device Exemption from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration should be considered. In this article we elaborate on the steps required to get a biomarker assay ready for use as an integral component of a clinical trial and give an example of the use of an integral assay in a phase III trial.
    Clinical Cancer Research 03/2012; 18(6):1540-6. · 7.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent discoveries in cancer biology have greatly increased the understanding of cancer at the molecular level, but translating this knowledge into clinically useful diagnostic tests has proved challenging. More efficient transfer of new molecular tests into patient care requires better standardization of laboratory practices, measurement methods and data management. The workshop assembled experts from National Cancer Institute, US FDA, National Institute of Standards and Technology, academia and industry, to address the most efficient approaches to biomarker standardization and validation. The workshop participants described the current state of research in molecular diagnostics standardization and addressed three questions: what has worked? What has not?And what needs improving?
    Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics 06/2013; 13(5):421-3. · 4.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Paralleling the growth of ever more cost efficient methods to sequence the whole genome in minute fragments of tissue has been the identification of increasingly numerous molecular abnormalities in cancers-mutations, amplifications, insertions and deletions of genes, and patterns of differential gene expression, i.e., overexpression of growth factors and underexpression of tumor suppressor genes. These abnormalities can be translated into assays to be used in clinical decision making. In general terms, the result of such an assay is subject to a large number of variables regarding the characteristics of the available sample, particularities of the used assay, and the interpretation of the results. This review discusses the effects of these variables on assays of tissue-based biomarkers, classified by macromolecule-DNA, RNA (including micro RNA, messenger RNA, long noncoding RNA, protein, and phosphoprotein). Since the majority of clinically applicable biomarkers are immunohistochemically detectable proteins this review focuses on protein biomarkers. However, the principles outlined are mostly applicable to any other analyte. A variety of preanalytical variables impacts on the results obtained, including analyte stability (which is different for different analytes, i.e., DNA, RNA, or protein), period of warm and of cold ischemia, fixation time, tissue processing, sample storage time, and storage conditions. In addition, assay variables play an important role, including reagent specificity (notably but not uniquely an issue concerning antibodies used in immunohistochemistry), technical components of the assay, quantitation, and assay interpretation. Finally, appropriateness of an assay for clinical application is an important issue. Reference is made to publicly available guidelines to improve on biomarker development in general and requirements for clinical use in particular. Strategic goals are formulated in order to improve on the quality of biomarker reporting, including issues of analyte quality, experimental detail, assay efficiency and precision, and assay appropriateness.
    Archiv für Pathologische Anatomie und Physiologie und für Klinische Medicin 02/2014; · 2.68 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
0 Downloads
Available from