Assessing Patient Risk, Benefit, and Outcomes in Drug Development: A Decade of Lenvatinib Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review

被引:1
|
作者
Crotty, Patrick [1 ]
Kari, Karim [1 ]
Hughes, Griffin K. [1 ]
Ladd, Chase [1 ]
McIntire, Ryan [1 ]
Gardner, Brooke [1 ]
Pena, Andriana M. [1 ]
Ferrell, Sydney [5 ]
Tuia, Jordan [4 ]
Cohn, Jacob [3 ]
Haslam, Alyson [4 ]
Prasad, Vinay [4 ]
Vassar, Matt [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Oklahoma State Univ, Off Med Student Res, Ctr Hlth Sci, 1111 W 17th St, Tulsa, OK 74107 USA
[2] Oklahoma State Univ, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Psychiat & Behav Sci, Tulsa, OK USA
[3] Oklahoma State Univ, Ctr Hlth Sci, Dept Internal Med, Tulsa, OK USA
[4] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, San Francisco, CA USA
[5] Univ Vermont, Med Ctr, Dept Internal Med, Burlington, VT USA
关键词
SUCCESS;
D O I
10.1007/s11523-024-01040-5
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
ImportanceChemotherapy agents are typically initially tested in their most promising indications; however, following initial US FDA approval, new clinical trials are often initiated in less promising indications where patients experience a worse burden-benefit ratio. The current literature on the burden-benefit profile of lenvatinib in non-FDA-approved indications is lacking.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate published clinical trials of lenvatinib in order to determine the burden-benefit profile for patients over time.Evidence ReviewOn 25 May 2023, we searched the Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for clinical trials of lenvatinib used to treat solid cancers. Eligible articles were clinical trials, containing adult participants, published in English, and involving solid tumors. Screening and data collection took place in a masked, duplicate fashion. For each eligible study, we collected adverse event data, trial characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). Trials were classified as positive when meeting their primary endpoint and safety, negative (not meeting either criteria), or indeterminate (lacking prespecified primary endpoint).FindingsExpansion of clinical trial testing beyond lenvatinib's initial FDA indication demonstrated a consistent rise in cumulative adverse events, along with a decline in drug efficacy. Lenvatinib was tested in 16 cancer indications, receiving FDA approval in 4. A total of 5390 Grade 3-5 adverse events were experienced across 6225 clinical trial participants. Expanded indication testing further demonstrated widely variable ORR (11-69%), OS (6.2-32 months), and PFS (3.6-15.7 months) across all indications. After initial FDA approval, clinical trial results in expanded indications were less likely to meet their primary endpoints, particularly among non-randomized clinical trials.Conclusion and relevanceOur paper evaluated the effectiveness of lenvatinib for its FDA-approved indications; however, expansion of clinical trials into novel indications was characterized by diminished efficacy, while patients experienced a high burden of adverse events consistent with lenvatinib's established safety profile. Furthermore, clinical trials testing in novel indications was marked by repeated phase I and II clinical trials along with a failure to progress to phase III clinical trials. Future clinical trials using lenvatinib as an intervention should carefully evaluate the potential benefits and burden patients may experience.
引用
收藏
页码:161 / 173
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Assessing cancer clinical trials. Will your patient benefit from a 'breakthrough'?
    Markman, M
    CLEVELAND CLINIC JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 69 (05) : 368 - +
  • [22] Patient-Important Outcomes in Clinical Trials of Atopic Diseases in the Last Decade
    Garcia Campa, Mariano
    Gonzalez-Diaz, Sandra Nora
    Noyola-Perez, Andres
    Macouzet-Sanchez, Carlos
    Alvarez-Villalobos, Neri
    JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 2023, 151 (02) : AB185 - AB185
  • [23] A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Assessing Sexuality in Hysterectomized Patients
    Martinez-Cayuelas, Laura
    Sarrio-Sanz, Pau
    Palazon-Bru, Antonio
    Verdu-Verdu, Lidia
    Lopez-Lopez, Ana
    Gil-Guillen, Vicente Francisco
    Romero-Maroto, Jesus
    Gomez-Perez, Luis
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2021, 18 (08)
  • [24] Use of composite outcomes to assess risk-benefit in clinical trials
    Shaw, Pamela A.
    CLINICAL TRIALS, 2018, 15 (04) : 352 - 358
  • [25] Applying a Risk-benefit Analysis to Outcomes in Tuberculosis Clinical Trials
    Miyahara, Sachiko
    Ramchandani, Ritesh
    Kim, Soyeon
    Evans, Scott R.
    Gupta, Amita
    Swindells, Susan
    Chaisson, Richard E.
    Montepiedra, Grace
    CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2020, 70 (04) : 698 - 703
  • [26] Insufficient evidence to determine the impact of patient preferences on clinical outcomes in acupuncture trials: a systematic review
    Prady, Stephanie L.
    Burch, Jane
    Crouch, Simon
    MacPherson, Hugh
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (03) : 308 - 318
  • [27] Patient-reported outcomes in HIV clinical trials evaluating antiretroviral treatment: a systematic review
    Akinosoglou, Karolina
    Antonopoulou, Stefania
    Katsarolis, Ioannis
    Gogos, Charalambos A.
    AIDS CARE-PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIO-MEDICAL ASPECTS OF AIDS/HIV, 2021, 33 (09): : 1118 - 1126
  • [28] Patient-Reported Outcomes in Phase 3 Clinical Trials for Blood Cancers: A Systematic Review
    Patel, Kishan
    Ivanov, Alexandra
    Jocelyn, Tajmah
    Hantel, Andrew
    Garcia, Jacqueline S.
    Abel, Gregory A.
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2024, 7 (06)
  • [29] Patient-reported outcomes in randomised clinical trials of bladder cancer: an updated systematic review
    Mieke Van Hemelrijck
    Francesco Sparano
    Debra Josephs
    Mirjam Sprangers
    Francesco Cottone
    Fabio Efficace
    BMC Urology, 19
  • [30] Patient-reported outcomes in stroke clinical trials 2002-2016: a systematic review
    Price-Haywood, Eboni G.
    Harden-Barrios, Jewel
    Carr, Christopher
    Reddy, Laya
    Bazzano, Lydia A.
    van Driel, Mieke L.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2019, 28 (05) : 1119 - 1128