4.1 Article

What is the expected benefit of patient-centric clinical development in oncology?

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOPHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS
Volume 32, Issue 3, Pages 414-426

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10543406.2022.2065506

Keywords

Biomarker; drug development; precision oncology; sequence of trials

Funding

  1. National Institute for Health Research [NIHR300576]
  2. NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre [BRC-1215-20014]
  3. UK Medical Research Council [MC_UU_00002/14]
  4. National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR) [NIHR300576] Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The identification and quantification of predictive biomarkers play a crucial role in personalized medicine and patient-centric clinical development. This study proposes a simple metric, called expected clinical benefit (ECB), to evaluate the clinical benefit of biomarker-informed clinical development programs. The results show that the ECB of biomarker-driven strategies is specific and sensitive, and the difference in ECB increases with the incremental efficacy driven by biomarkers and the population prevalence of biomarker-positive study participants.
The identification and quantification of predictive biomarkers characterize personalized medicine approaches and patient-centric clinical development. In practice, the sponsor needs evaluating whether biomarker-informed clinical development strategies are more likely to benefit current and future patients. To this end, a simple metric is proposed and assessed here quantifying the expected clinical benefit (ECB) of clinical development programmes. Using simulation scenarios and endpoints relevant to oncology, the ECB of a simple biomarker-informed strategy is shown to be specific and sensitive. Also, the ECB difference is shown to increase in the biomarker-driven incremental efficacy and with the population prevalence of biomarker-positive study participants.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available