Trends in the use and role of biomarkers in phase I oncology trials

Integrating Early-Stage Drug Development with Clinical Networks; Challenges and Opportunities: The City of Hope Developing Experience

Recent data suggest that patients with advanced cancer who participate in biomarker/genomically informed early-stage clinical trials experience clinical benefit. While most early-stage clinical trials are conducted in major academic centers, the majority of cancer patients in the United States are treated in community practices. Here, we describe ongoing efforts at the City of Hope Cancer Center to integrate our network community oncology clinical practices into our academic, centralized biomarker/genomic-driven, early-stage clinical trial program to build an understanding of the approaches that provide the benefits of early-stage clinical trial participation to community patients. Our efforts include three key initiatives: the development of a virtual "Refractory Disease" phase 1 trial matching televideo clinic, the construction of infrastructure to support the expansion of phase 1 clinical trials to a distant regional clinical satellite hub, and the implementation of an enterprise-wide precision medicine, germline, and somatic testing program. Our work at City of Hope may serve as an example to facilitate similar efforts at other institutions.

Impact of pharmacodynamic biomarkers in immuno-oncology phase 1 clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Phase 1 immuno-oncology (IO) trials frequently involve pharmacodynamic (PD) biomarker assessments involving tumour biopsies and/or blood collection, with increasing use of molecular imaging. PD biomarkers are set to play a fundamental role in early drug development of immuno-oncology (IO) agents. In the IO era, the impact of PD biomarkers for confirmation of biologic activity and their role in subsequent drug development have not been investigated.

METHODS

Phase 1 studies published between January 2014 and December 2020 were reviewed. Studies that reported on-treatment PD biomarkers [tissue-derived (tissue-PD), blood-based (blood-PD) and imaging-based (imaging-PD)] were analysed. PD biomarker results and their correlation with clinical activity endpoints were evaluated. Authors' statements on the influence of PD biomarkers on further drug development decisions, and subsequent citations of PD biomarker study results were recorded.

RESULTS

Among 386 trials, the most frequent IO agent classes evaluated were vaccines (32%) and PD-(L)1 inhibitors (25%). No PD biomarker assessments were reported in 100 trials (26%). Of the remaining 286, blood-PD, tissue-PD, and imaging-PD data were reported in 270 (94%), 94 (33%), and 12 (4%) trials, respectively. Assessments of more than one PD biomarker type were reported in 82 studies (29%). Similar proportions of blood-PD (9%), tissue-PD (7%), and imaging-PD studies (8%) had positive results that correlated with clinical activity. Results of 22 PD biomarker studies (8%) were referenced in subsequent clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Most phase 1 IO studies performed PD biomarker assessments. Overall, positive PD biomarker results were infrequently correlated with clinical activity or cited in subsequent trials, suggesting a limited impact on subsequent drug development. With emerging health regulatory emphasis on optimal dose selection based on PD activity, more informative and integrative multiplexed assays that capture the complexity of tumour-host immunity interactions are warranted to improve phase 1 IO trial methodology.

Ethical Considerations for Phase I Trials in Oncology

Phase I trials often represent the first occasion where new cancer strategies are tested in patients. Various developments in cancer biology, methodology, regulation, and medical ethics have altered the ethical landscape of such trials. We provide a narrative review of contemporary ethical challenges in design, conduct, and reporting of phase I cancer trials and outline recommendations for addressing each. We organized our review around four topics, supplementing the first three with scoping reviews: (1) benefit/risk, (2) research biopsies, (3) therapeutic misconception and misestimation, and (4) reporting. The main ethical challenges of conducting phase I trials stem from three issues. First, phase I trials often involve higher research burden and scientific uncertainty compared with other cancer trials. Second, many patients arrive at phase I trials at a transitional point in their illness trajectory where they have exhausted standard survival-extending options. Third, phase I trial results play a major role in informing downstream drug development and regulatory decisions. Together, these issues create distinct pressures for study design, ethical review, informed consent, and reporting. Developments in methodology, regulation, cancer biology, and ethical awareness have helped mitigate some of these challenges, while introducing others. We conclude our review with a series of recommendations regarding trial design, ethical review, consent, and reporting. We also outline several unresolved questions that, if addressed, would strengthen the ethical foundation of phase I cancer trials.

The Translational and Regulatory Development of an Implantable Microdevice for Multiple Drug Sensitivity Measurements in Cancer Patients

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to report the translational process of an implantable microdevice platform with an emphasis on the technical and engineering adaptations for patient use, regulatory advances, and successful integration into clinical workflow.

METHODS

We developed design adaptations for implantation and retrieval, established ongoing monitoring and testing, and facilitated regulatory advances that enabled the administration and examination of a large set of cancer therapies simultaneously in individual patients.

RESULTS

Six applications for oncology studies have successfully proceeded to patient trials, with future applications in progress.

CONCLUSION

First-in-human translation required engineering design changes to enable implantation and retrieval that fit with existing clinical workflows, a regulatory strategy that enabled both delivery and response measurement of up to 20 agents in a single patient, and establishment of novel testing and quality control processes for a drug/device combination product without clear precedents.

SIGNIFICANCE

This manuscript provides a real-world account and roadmap on how to advance from animal proof-of-concept into the clinic, confronting the question of how to use research to benefit patients.

Analyses of the Rationale and Implementation of Research Biopsies in Oncology Clinical Trials at a Tertiary Cancer Center

BACKGROUND

Biomarkers in clinical trials have led to massive incorporation of research biopsies, with potentially risks and no direct benefit for patients. In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) released an ethical framework to provide guidance on incorporating research biopsies in cancer clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected biopsy requirements of cancer clinical trials conducted at Institut Jules Bordet (IJB) between 2015 and 2019 to examine adherence with the ASCO Ethical Framework. We used logistic regression models to test the association between the request for biopsy, the request for tissue, and the adherence to the ASCO framework as well as some trial characteristics.

RESULTS

Between January 2015 and December 2019, 178 oncological studies were conducted at IJB. Of these, 138 (78%) were sponsored by industry, 132 (74%) were phase II and III studies, and 141 (79%) concerned metastatic disease. Tissue was required for inclusion for 119 (67%) studies, among which 59 required at least one new biopsy. Adherence to ASCO's Ethical Framework was 67% for studies requiring tissue and went down to 39% for studies requiring at least one new biopsy. In multivariate analysis, requests for tissue or new biopsies increased in early-phase studies (p < .001, p < .001, respectively) and in studies investigating innovative treatments (immunotherapy or targeted therapies; p < .01, p = .02). Compliance to the ASCO framework significantly decreased with time (p < .001) and in early-phase studies (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Numerous studies required tissue or new biopsies for exploratory objectives of unknown clinical utility. Requests for tissue increased over the years, whereas compliance to ASCO's Ethical Framework decreased.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

In 2019, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) developed an ethical framework to provide guidance on incorporating research biopsies in clinical trials. This study underlines the growing request for tissue in clinical trials with potentially no impact on drug development and no benefit to actual or future patients. Adherence to ASCO's Ethical Framework decreases through time. These results highlight the importance of improving the ethics of research biopsies. ASCO's Ethical Framework offers an opportunity to improve quality of care in clinical research by maximizing scientific utility and allowing for clinically meaningful correlative science and safe access to innovative treatments for a maximum number of patients.

Variability in biopsy quality informs translational research applications in hepatocellular carcinoma

In the era of precision medicine, biopsies are playing an increasingly central role in cancer research and treatment paradigms; however, patient outcomes and analyses of biopsy quality, as well as impact on downstream clinical and research applications, remain underreported. Herein, we report biopsy safety and quality outcomes for percutaneous core biopsies of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) performed as part of a prospective clinical trial. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of HCC were enrolled in a prospective cohort study for the genetic, proteomic, and metabolomic profiling of HCC at two academic medical centers from April 2016 to July 2020. Under image guidance, 18G core biopsies were obtained using coaxial technique at the time of locoregional therapy. The primary outcome was biopsy quality, defined as tumor fraction in the core biopsy. 56 HCC lesions from 50 patients underwent 60 biopsy events with a median of 8 core biopsies per procedure (interquartile range, IQR, 7–10). Malignancy was identified in 45/56 (80.4%, 4 without pathology) biopsy events, including HCC (40/56, 71.4%) and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) or combined HCC-CCA (5/56, 8.9%). Biopsy quality was highly variable with a median of 40% tumor in each biopsy core (IQR 10–75). Only 43/56 (76.8%) and 23/56 (41.1%) samples met quality thresholds for genomic or metabolomic/proteomic profiling, respectively, requiring expansion of the clinical trial. Overall and major complication rates were 5/60 (8.3%) and 3/60 (5.0%), respectively. Despite uniform biopsy protocol, biopsy quality varied widely with up to 59% of samples to be inadequate for intended purpose. This finding has important consequences for clinical trial design and highlights the need for quality control prior to applications in which the presence of benign cell types may substantially alter findings.

An analysis of research biopsy core variability from over 5000 prospectively collected core samples

Factors correlated with biopsy tissue adequacy and the prevalence of within-biopsy variability were evaluated. Totally, 1149 research biopsies were performed on 686 patients from which 5090 cores were assessed. Biopsy cores were reviewed for malignant percentage (estimated percentage of cells in the core that were malignant) and malignant area (estimated area occupied by malignant cells). Linear mixed models and generalized linear mixed models were used for the analysis. A total of 641 (55.8%) biopsies contained a core with <10% malignant percentage (inadequate core). The chance of an inadequate core was not influenced by core order, though the malignant area decreased with each consecutive core (p < 0.001). Younger age, bone biopsy location, appendiceal tumor pathology, and responding/stable disease prior to biopsy increased the odds of a biopsy containing zero adequate cores. Within-biopsy variability in core adequacy is prevalent and suggests the need for histological tumor quality assessment of each core in order to optimize translational analyses.

The value of interventional radiology in clinical trial teams: experience from the BATTLE lung cancer trials

AIM

To report on the multidisciplinary approach, focusing specifically on the role of the interventional radiologist (IR), used to support the Biomarker-integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination (BATTLE) and BATTLE-2 trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent percutaneous image-guided biopsy for the BATTLE and BATTLE-2 trials were reviewed. A radiology-based, three-point, lesion-scoring system was developed and used by two IRs. Lesions were given a score of 3 (most likely to yield sufficient material for biomarker analysis) if they met the following criteria: size >2 cm, solid mass, demonstrated imaging evidence of viability, and were technically easy to sample. Lesions not meeting all four criteria were scored 2 with the missing criteria noted as negative factors. Lesions considered to have risks that outweighed potential benefits receive a score of 1 and were not biopsied. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the score's ability to predict successful yield for biomarker adequacy.

RESULTS

A total of 555 biopsies were performed. The overall yield for analysis of the required biomarkers was 86.1% (478/555), and 84% (268/319) and 88.9% (210/236) for BATTLE and BATTLE-2, respectively (p=0.09). Lesions receiving a score of 3 were adequate for biomarker analysis in 89% of cases. Lesions receiving a score of 2 with more than two negative factors were adequate for molecular analysis in 69.2% (IR1, p=0.03) and 74% (IR2, p=0.04) of cases. The two IRs scored 78.4% of the lesions the same indicating moderate agreement (kappa=0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48, 0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

IRs add value to clinical trial teams by optimising lesions selected for biopsy and biomarker analysis.

Assessment of Reported Trial Characteristics, Rate of Publication, and Inclusion of Mandatory Biopsies of Research Biopsies in Clinical Trials in Oncology

Importance

Research biopsies are frequently incorporated within clinical trials in oncology and are often a mandatory requirement for trial enrollment. However, limited information is available regarding the extent and completeness of research biopsy reporting.

Objectives

To determine the rate of research biopsy reporting for clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and determine the clinical trial factors that correlated with research biopsy reporting.

Design, Setting, and Participants

ClinicalTrials.gov (CTG) was searched for all oncologic therapeutic clinical trials with completion dates between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2015, with end point category terms including biopsy, biopsies, or tissue. The date of the final publication search was March 12, 2018. Trials conducting only diagnostic biopsies or trials using bone marrow biopsies or liquid biopsies were excluded. Credit for biopsy reporting was given for any mention of performing or results from tissue biopsies in publications. Clinical trials were compared with the highest level of corresponding publication or registry report. Fisher exact test was used for analysis.

Results

A total of 301 clinical trials were identified, with a median of 37 patients (range, 1-1310 patients) enrolled per trial. After a median follow-up time of 5.8 years from trial completion, 244 of 301 trials (81.1%) reported results: publications in 195 (64.8%) and CTG registry in 49 (16.3%). Reporting of trial results was associated with later-stage trials (phase 2/3) (137 of 153 [89.5%] for phase 2/3 vs 107 of 148 [72.3%] for phase 1 or 1/2 trials; P < .001). Results from research biopsies were reported in 153 of 301 (50.8%) trials or in 153 of 244 (62.7%) trials with published results. Rates varied by type of presentation: 142 of 195 publications (72.8%) vs 11 of 49 CTG reports (22.4%) (P < .001). Conducting mandatory biopsies (82.1% [101 of 123] vs 43.0% [52 of 121]; P < .001), early-phase clinical trials (70.1% [75 of 107] vs 56.9% [78 of 137]; P = .03), and listing the biopsy as a primary objective in CTG (76.3% [45 of 59] vs 58.4% [108 of 185]; P = .01) was associated with improved biopsy reporting. Trials that met their primary end point (71.9% [115 of 160] vs 45.2% [38 of 84]; P < .001) and those published in higher-impact journals (81.1% [77 of 95] vs 65.0% [65 of 100]; P = .01) had improved biopsy reporting. Mandatory biopsies and biopsy reporting increased over time with similar slopes (P = .58).

Conclusions and Relevance

Despite ethical obligations to report research biopsies, only 50.8% of all trials that included a research biopsy-related end point in CTG reported on these biopsy-related results. Improved efforts are needed to report results obtained from research biopsies.

Empowering phase II clinical trials to reduce phase III failures

The large number of failures in phase III clinical trials, which occur at a rate of approximately 45%, is studied herein relative to possible countermeasures. First, the phenomenon of failures is numerically described. Second, the main reasons for failures are reported, together with some generic improvements suggested in the related literature. This study shows how statistics explain, but do not justify, the high failure rate observed. The rate of failures due to a lack of efficacy that are not expected, is considered to be at least 10%. Expanding phase II is the simplest and most intuitive way to reduce phase III failures since it can reduce phase III false negative findings and launches of phase III trials when the treatment is positive but suboptimal. Moreover, phase II enlargement is discussed using an economic profile. As resources for research are often limited, enlarging phase II should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Alternative strategies, such as biomarker-based enrichments and adaptive designs, may aid in reducing failures. However, these strategies also have very low application rates with little likelihood of rapid growth.

Ethical Framework for Including Research Biopsies in Oncology Clinical Trials: American Society of Clinical Oncology Research Statement

In contrast to clinical biopsies, where tissue is collected to inform patient care, research biopsies are performed for scientific purposes to potentially enhance understanding of the biologic bases of cancer and drug action, thereby improving diagnosis and treatment, but they may offer no direct benefit to participants and have known risks. The widespread use of research biopsies that do not have the potential to directly benefit participants has come under scrutiny, with critics raising ethical concerns related to the adequacy of participant protections, informed consent, and participant understanding of the risks and benefits, as well as the scientific impact of research biopsies on drug development and treatment. This manuscript presents the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s (ASCO’s) ethical framework for incorporation of research biopsies in trials. The framework provides guidance on the circumstances to include optional and mandatory biopsies, as well as provides recommendations to stakeholders on necessary steps for improving the conduct of research biopsies overall.

Dacomitinib in non-small-cell lung cancer: a comprehensive review for clinical application

Dacomitinib is a second-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that irreversibly binds to and inhibits EGFR/Her1, Her2 and Her4 subtypes with an efficacy comparable to other TKIs. In the ARCHER 1050 trial, progression-free survival was improved by dacomitinib compared with gefitinib, supporting dacomitinib as a first-line treatment option for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with sensitive EGFR mutation. Regarding to the higher adverse events rate, dose reductions did not reduce the efficacy of dacomitinib and could effectively decreased the incidence and severity of adverse events. Considering the evolving landscape of EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer, future head to head comparison between dacomitinib and osimertinib could provide key information to determine the optimal TKI treatment schedule.

Negative Biopsy of Focal Hepatic Lesions: Decision Tree Model for Patient Management

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate patient- and procedure-related variables affecting the false-negative rate of ultrasound (US)-guided liver biopsy and to develop a standardized patient-tailored predictive model for the management of negative biopsy results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively included 389 patients (mean age ± SD, 62 ± 12 years old) who had undergone US-guided liver biopsy of 405 liver lesions between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2015. We collected multiple patient- and procedure-related variables. By comparing pathology reports of biopsy and the reference standard (further histology or imaging follow-up), we were able to categorize the biopsy results as true-positive, true-negative, and false-negative. Diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic yield were measured. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify variables predicting false-negative results. A standardized patient-tailored predictive model of false-negative results based on a decision tree was fitted.

RESULTS

Diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic yield were 93.8% (380/405) and 89.4% (362/405), respectively. The false-negative rate was 6.5% (25/387). Predictive variables of false-negative results at univariate analysis included body mass index, lesion size, sample acquisition techniques, and immediate specimen adequacy. The only independent predictors at multivariate analysis were patient age and Charlson comorbidity index. By combining lesion size and location with patient age and history of malignancy, we developed a decision tree model that predicts false-negative results with high confidence (up to 100%).

CONCLUSION

False-negative results are not negligible at US-guided liver biopsy. The combination of selected lesion- and patient-specific variables may help predict when aggressive management is warranted in patients with likely false-negative results.

Molecular Pharmacodynamics-Guided Scheduling of Biologically Effective Doses: A Drug Development Paradigm Applied to MET Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

The development of molecularly targeted agents has benefited from use of pharmacodynamic markers to identify "biologically effective doses" (BED) below MTDs, yet this knowledge remains underutilized in selecting dosage regimens and in comparing the effectiveness of targeted agents within a class. We sought to establish preclinical proof-of-concept for such pharmacodynamics-based BED regimens and effectiveness comparisons using MET kinase small-molecule inhibitors. Utilizing pharmacodynamic biomarker measurements of MET signaling (tumor pY^1234/1235MET/total MET ratio) in a phase 0-like preclinical setting, we developed optimal dosage regimens for several MET kinase inhibitors and compared their antitumor efficacy in a MET-amplified gastric cancer xenograft model (SNU-5). Reductions in tumor pY^1234/1235MET/total MET of 95%-99% were achievable with tolerable doses of EMD1214063/MSC2156119J (tepotinib), XL184 (cabozantinib), and XL880/GSK1363089 (foretinib), but not ARQ197 (tivantinib), which did not alter the pharmacodynamic biomarker. Duration of kinase suppression and rate of kinase recovery were specific to each agent, emphasizing the importance of developing customized dosage regimens to achieve continuous suppression of the pharmacodynamic biomarker at the required level (here, ≥90% MET kinase suppression). The customized dosage regimen of each inhibitor yielded substantial and sustained tumor regression; the equivalent effectiveness of customized dosage regimens that achieve the same level of continuous molecular target control represents preclinical proof-of-concept and illustrates the importance of proper scheduling of targeted agent BEDs. Pharmacodynamics-guided biologically effective dosage regimens (PD-BEDR) potentially offer a superior alternative to pharmacokinetic guidance (e.g., drug concentrations in surrogate tissues) for developing and making head-to-head comparisons of targeted agents. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(3); 698-709. ©2018 AACR.

Underreporting of Research Biopsies from Clinical Trials in Oncology

Purpose: Research biopsies are frequently incorporated within clinical trials in oncology and are often a mandatory requirement for trial enrollment. However, limited information is available regarding the extent and completeness of research biopsy reporting.Experimental Design: We identified a cohort of therapeutic clinical trials where research biopsies were performed between January 2005 and October 2010 from an IR database at our institution. Clinical trial protocols were compared with the highest level of corresponding publication as a manuscript or registry report.Results: A total of 866 research biopsies were performed across 46 clinical trials, with a median of 8 patients biopsied/trial and 19 biopsies collected/trial. After a median follow-up time of 4.3 years from trial completion, 36 of 46 trials (78%) reported trial results: published manuscripts (n = 35), or registry report (n = 1). A total of 635 conducted biopsies were reported in 18 of the 46 trials (39%). Six (33%) of these 18 trials underreported the number of biopsies performed. Of 33 trials with mandatory research biopsies, 13 (39%) trials reported on these biopsies. Biopsy complications occurred in 8 trials [n = 39 patients, 6 grade 3/4 adverse events (AE)] but only 1 trial reported these. Factors associated with biopsy reporting included a larger number of biopsies (P ≤ 0.001) and serial biopsies (P < 0.001). Twelve of 16 (75%) trials with >12 biopsies performed reported on these biopsies compared with only 20% (6/30) that performed ≤12 biopsies.Conclusions: Despite ethical obligations to report research biopsies, the majority (61%) of trials do not report results from research biopsies. Complications are rarely reported in these studies. Improved reporting of results and AEs from research biopsies is needed. Clin Cancer Res; 23(21); 6450-7. ©2017 AACR.

Burdensome Research Procedures in Trials: Why Less Is More

A large volume of trials involve invasive, nontherapeutic research procedures, like organ biopsy or sham surgeries, that can pose risks comparable with the experimental treatment itself but that have no direct benefit for volunteers. Though such procedures can enhance the value of clinical investigations, recent studies suggest that many studies involving invasive, nontherapeutic research procedures are not well planned and reported; some studies suggest that their results are often not utilized in the planning of new investigations. This commentary offers recommendations for how investigators, sponsors, and ethics committees might improve evaluation and implementation of studies involving invasive nontherapeutic procedures. We conclude by urging more demanding scientific standards for the rationale, design, and reporting of burdensome, nontherapeutic research procedures-particularly where they involve risk of serious complications.

Effect of cryopreservation on delineation of immune cell subpopulations in tumor specimens as determinated by multiparametric single cell mass cytometry analysis

Background

Comprehensive understanding of cellular immune subsets involved in regulation of tumor progression is central to the development of cancer immunotherapies. Single cell immunophenotyping has historically been accomplished by flow cytometry (FC) analysis, enabling the analysis of up to 18 markers. Recent advancements in mass cytometry (MC) have facilitated detection of over 50 markers, utilizing high resolving power of mass spectrometry (MS). This study examined an analytical and operational feasibility of MC for an in-depth immunophenotyping analysis of the tumor microenvironment, using the commercial CyTOF™ instrument, and further interrogated challenges in managing the integrity of tumor specimens.

Results

Initial longitudinal studies with frozen peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) showed minimal MC inter-assay variability over nine independent runs. In addition, detection of common leukocyte lineage markers using MC and FC detection confirmed that these methodologies are comparable in cell subset identification. An advanced multiparametric MC analysis of 39 total markers enabled a comprehensive evaluation of cell surface marker expression in fresh and cryopreserved tumor samples. This comparative analysis revealed significant reduction of expression levels of multiple markers upon cryopreservation. Most notably myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSC), defined by co-expression of CD66b⁺ and CD15⁺, HLA-DR^dim and CD14⁻ phenotype, were undetectable in frozen samples.

Conclusion

These results suggest that optimization and evaluation of cryopreservation protocols is necessary for accurate biomarker discovery in frozen tumor specimens.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12865-017-0192-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Critical parameters in targeted drug development: the pharmacological audit trail

The Pharmacological Audit Trail (PhAT) comprises a set of critical questions that need to be asked during discovery and development of an anticancer drug. Key aspects include: (1) defining a patient population; (2) establishing pharmacokinetic characteristics; (3) providing evidence of target engagement, pathway modulation, and biological effect with proof of concept pharmacodynamic biomarkers; (4) determining intermediate biomarkers of response; (5) assessing tumor response; and (6) determining how to overcome resistance by combination or sequential therapy and new target/drug discovery. The questions asked in the PhAT should be viewed as a continuum and not used in isolation. Different drug development programmes derive different types of benefit from these questions. The PhAT is critical in making go-no-go decisions in the development of currently studied drugs and will continue to be relevant to discovery and development of future generations of anticancer agents.

Theory and practice of clinical pharmacodynamics in oncology drug development

The clinical development of molecularly targeted cancer therapies is enhanced by proof of mechanism of action as well as proof of concept, which relate molecular pharmacodynamics to efficacy via changes in cancer cell biology and physiology resulting from drug action on its intended target. Here, we present an introduction to the field of clinical pharmacodynamics, its medical and laboratory aspects, and its practical incorporation into clinical trials. We also describe key success factors that are useful for judging the quality of clinical pharmacodynamic studies, including biopsy quality and suitability, specimen handling, assay fitness-for-purpose, and reagent quality control. This introduction provides not only context for the following articles in this issue, but also an appreciation of the role of well-conducted clinical pharmacodynamic studies in oncology drug development.

Establishing proof of mechanism: Assessing target modulation in early-phase clinical trials

Since modulation of the putative target and the observed anti-tumor effects form the basis for the clinical development of a molecularly targeted therapy, early-phase clinical trials should be designed to demonstrate proof-of-mechanism in tissues of interest. In addition to establishing safety and the maximum tolerated dose, first-in-human clinical trials should be designed to demonstrate target modulation, define the proposed mechanism of action, and evaluate pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships of a new anti-cancer agent. Assessing target modulation in paired tumor biopsies in patients with solid tumors presents multiple challenges, including procedural issues such as patient safety, ethical considerations, and logistics of sample handling and processing. In addition, the availability of qualified biomarker assay technologies, resources to conduct such studies, and real-time analysis of samples to detect inter-species differences that may affect the determination of optimal sampling time points must be taken into account. This article provides a discussion of the challenges that confront the practical application of pharmacodynamic studies in early-phase clinical trials of anti-cancer agents.

A pharmacodynamically guided dose selection of PF-00337210 in a phase I study in patients with advanced solid tumors

PURPOSE

PF-00337210 is an oral, highly selective vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor. We evaluated a composite of biomarkers in real time to identify the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) and preliminary anticancer activity of PF-00337210.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients (Pts) with advanced cancers were treated once (QD) or twice daily (BID) with escalating doses. Acute effects on tumor perfusion and vascularity were assessed using DCE-MRI, weekly BP readings, soluble VEGFR-2, and hemoglobin levels.

RESULTS

Forty-six pts were treated with 0.67-9 mg QD and 4-6 mg BID of PF-00337210. Nineteen pts (41%) previously received VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors. Two pts had dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) at 9 mg QD (troponin I increase and hypertension). The MTD at QD dose was 8 mg. Common drug-related adverse events were hypertension, fatigue, proteinuria, and nausea. Hypertension incidence and intensity corresponded with dose, but was well controlled with medication. Two confirmed partial responses and minor regressions (>10 to <30% reduction in target lesions) were noted. Complete DCE-MRI was acquired in 21 pts (20 evaluable for vascular response). Ten pts were vascular responders, including 5/6 pts at BID doses. Greatest modulation of soluble VEGFR-2 was at 6 mg BID. The maximum change from baseline in diastolic BP was higher at BID doses. There were no significant differences for systolic BP and hemoglobin levels.

CONCLUSIONS

PF-00337210 has profound VEGFR inhibition effects at well-tolerated doses. Antitumor activity and VEGF inhibition effects were observed across BID doses. The RP2D was 6 mg BID.

Analysis of Impact of Post-Treatment Biopsies in Phase I Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

The use of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers is increasing in early-phase clinical trials. It remains unknown whether drug development is accelerated or enhanced by their use. We examined the impact of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers on subsequent drug development through a comprehensive analysis of phase I oncology studies from 2003 to 2010 and subsequent publications citing the original trials.

METHODS

We conducted a search to identify and examine publications of phase I oncology studies including the use of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers between 2003 and 2010. Characteristics of those studies were extracted and analyzed, along with outcomes from the biomarker data. We then compiled and reviewed publications of subsequent phase II and III trials citing the original phase I biomarker studies to determine the impact on drug development.

RESULTS

We identified 4,840 phase I oncology publications between 2003 and 2010. Seventy-two studies included a biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarker. The proportion of biomarker studies including nondiagnostic biopsies increased over time (P = .002). A minimum of 1,873 tumor biopsies were documented in the 72 studies, 12 of which reported a statistically significant biomarker result. Thirty-three percent of studies (n = 24) were referenced by subsequent publications specifically with regard to the biomarkers. Only five positive biomarker studies were cited subsequently, and maximum tolerated dose was used for subsequent drug development in all cases.

CONCLUSION

Despite their increased use, the impact of biopsy-derived pharmacodynamic biomarkers in phase I oncology studies on subsequent drug development remains uncertain. No impact on subsequent dose or schedule was demonstrated. This issue requires further evaluation, given the risk and cost of such studies.

The use of circulating biomarkers in early clinical trials in patients with cancer

The development of targeted therapies has changed the approach to early oncological clinical trial design. Identification of patient populations most likely to derive benefit and the biologically effective dose are now as important as determination of the maximum tolerated dose. Completion of the 'pharmacological audit trail' highlights drugs most likely to progress through to license, so resources can be allocated appropriately. Key to the success of this changing model is the validation/qualification of circulating biomarkers. These might provide a readily accessible and dynamic picture of drug effect, tumor response and toxicity with minimum risk to patients. This review article examines circulating biomarkers currently used in early oncological clinical trials. It considers the evidence for their employment, limitations and challenges for future development.

Improving access to novel agents for childhood leukemia

Leukemia is the most common pediatric cancer. Despite great progress in the development of curative therapy, leukemia remains a leading cause of death from disease in childhood, and survivors are at life-long risk of complications of treatment. New agents are needed to further increase cure rates and decrease treatment-associated toxicities. The complex biology and aggressive nature of childhood leukemia, coupled with the relatively small patient population available for study, pose specific challenges to the development of new therapies. In this review, the authors discuss strategies and initiatives designed to improve access to new agents in the treatment of pediatric leukemia.

Pharmacodynamic biomarkers: falling short of the mark?

In recent years, the clinical development of targeted therapies has been advanced by a greater understanding of tumor biology and genomics. Nonetheless, drug development remains a slow and costly process. An additional challenge is that targeted therapies may benefit only a subset of patients treated-typically those patients whose tumors are dependent on the target of interest. Thus, there is a growing need for the incorporation of both predictive and pharmacodynamic (PD) biomarkers in drug development. Predictive biomarkers are important to help guide patient selection, while PD biomarkers can provide information on the pharmacologic effects of a drug on its target. PD studies may provide insights into proof of mechanism (i.e., Does the agent hit its intended target?) and proof of concept (i.e., Does hitting the drug target result in the desired biologic effect?). PD studies may also provide information on the optimal biologic dosing or scheduling of a targeted agent. Herein, we review PD endpoints in the context of targeted drug development in non-small cell lung cancer, highlighting some of the key challenges encountered to date. In doing so, we discuss recent experiences with repeat tumor biopsies, surrogate tissue analysis, alternative clinical trial designs (e.g., window-of-opportunity trials), circulating biomarkers, and mechanism-based toxicity assessments. The application of such technologies and biomarkers in early clinical trials may facilitate rational drug development, while enhancing our understanding of why certain targeted therapies succeed or fail. See all articles in this CCR focus section, "Progress in pharmacodynamic endpoints."

Mechanistic understanding of translational pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships in nonclinical tumor models: a case study of orally available novel inhibitors of anaplastic lymphoma kinase

The orally available novel small molecules PF06463922 [(10R)-7-amino-12-fluoro-2,10,16-trimethyl-15-oxo-10,15,16,17-tetrahydro-2H-8,4-(metheno)pyrazolo[4,3-h][2,5,11]benzoxadiazacyclotetradecine-3-carbonitrile] and PF06471402 [(10R)-7-amino-12-fluoro-2,10,16-trimethyl-15-oxo-10,15,16,17-tetrahydro-2H-8,4-(azeno)pyrazolo[4,3-h][2,5,11]benzoxadiazacyclo-tetradecine-3-carbonitrile] are second-generation anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors targeted to both naïve and resistant patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to the first-generation ALK inhibitor crizotinib. The objectives of the present study were to characterize and compare the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) relationships of PF06463922 and PF06471402 for target modulation in tumor and antitumor efficacy in athymic mice implanted with H3122 NSCLC cells expressing a crizotinib-resistant echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4 (EML4)-ALK mutation, EML4-ALK(L1196M). Furthermore, the PKPD relationships for these ALK inhibitors were evaluated and compared between oral administration and subcutaneous constant infusion (i.e., between different pharmacokinetic [PK] profiles). Oral and subcutaneous PK profiles of these ALK inhibitors were adequately described by a one-compartment PK model. An indirect response model extended with a modulator fit the time courses of PF06463922- and PF06471402-mediated target modulation (i.e., ALK phosphorylation) with an estimated unbound EC50,in vivo of 36 and 20 nM, respectively, for oral administration, and 100 and 69 nM, respectively, for subcutaneous infusion. A drug-disease model based on the turnover concept fit tumor growth curves inhibited by PF06463922 and PF06471402 with estimated unbound tumor stasis concentrations of 51 and 27 nM, respectively, for oral administration, and 116 and 70 nM, respectively, for subcutaneous infusion. Thus, the EC50,in vivo to EC60,in vivo estimates for ALK inhibition corresponded to the concentrations required tumor stasis in all cases, suggesting that the pharmacodynamic relationships of target modulation to antitumor efficacy were consistent among the ALK inhibitors, even when the PK profiles with different administration routes were considerably different.

Translation of anticancer efficacy from nonclinical models to the clinic

Mouse cancer models have provided critical insights into tumor biology; however, clinical translation of these findings has been challenging. This perspective posits that factors impacting on successful translation start with limitations in capturing human cancer pathophysiology and end with challenges in generating robust translatable preclinical end points. A comprehensive approach that considers clinically relevant mouse models with both an integrated biomarker strategy and a complementary modeling and simulation effort will strengthen the current oncology drug development paradigm.

Use of blood-based biomarkers for early diagnosis and surveillance of colorectal cancer

Early screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) holds the key to combat and control the increasing global burden of CRC morbidity and mortality. However, the current available screening modalities are severely inadequate because of their high cost and cumbersome preparatory procedures that ultimately lead to a low participation rate. People simply do not like to have colonoscopies. It would be ideal, therefore, to develop an alternative modality based on blood biomarkers as the first line screening test. This will allow for the differentiation of the general population from high risk individuals. Colonoscopy would then become the secondary test, to further screen the high risk segment of the population. This will encourage participation and therefore help to reach the goal of early detection and thereby reduce the anticipated increasing global CRC incidence rate. A blood-based screening test is an appealing alternative as it is non-invasive and poses minimal risk to patients. It is easy to perform, can be repeated at shorter intervals, and therefore would likely lead to a much higher participation rate. This review surveys various blood-based test strategies currently under investigation, discusses the potency of what is available, and assesses how new technology may contribute to future test design.

New cast for a new era: preclinical cancer drug development revisited

Molecularly targeted agents promise to revolutionize therapeutics by reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. However, despite an urgent need for more effective anticancer compounds, current preclinical drug evaluations largely fail to satisfy the demand. New preclinical strategies, including the improvement of sophisticated mouse models and co-clinical study designs, are being used to augment the predictive value of animal-based translational cancer research. Here, we review the development of successful preclinical antineoplastic agents, their associated limitations, and alternative methods to predict clinical outcomes.

Research biopsies in the context of early phase oncology studies: clinical and ethical considerations

The Personalized Medicine approach in oncology is a direct result of an improved understanding of complex tumor biology and advances in diagnostic technologies. In recent years, there has been an increased demand for archival and fresh tumor analysis in early clinical trials to foster proof-of-concept biomarker development, to understand resistance mechanisms, and ultimately to assess biological response. Although phase I studies are aimed at defining drug safety, pharmacokinetics, and to recommend a phase II dose for further testing, there is now increasing evidence of mandatory tumor biopsies even at the earliest dose-finding stages of drug development. The increasing demand for fresh tumor biopsies adds to the complexity of novel phase I studies and results in different challenges, ranging from logistical support to ethical concerns. This paper investigates key issues, including patients’ perceptions of research biopsies, the need for accurate informed consent, and alternative strategies that may guide the drug development process.

Reporting practices of pharmacodynamic studies involving invasive research procedures in cancer trials

Background:

Tumour biopsy for pharmacodynamic (PD) study is increasingly common in early-phase cancer trials. As they are non-diagnostic, the ethical justification for such procedures rests on their knowledge value. On the premise that knowledge value is related to reporting practices and outcome diversity, we assessed in a sample of recent invasive PD studies within cancer trials.

Methods:

We assessed reporting practices and outcomes for PD studies in a convenience sample of cancer trials published from 2000 to 2010 that employed invasive, non-diagnostic tissue procurement. Extracted data were used to measure outcome reporting in individual trials. Using a reporting scale we developed for exploratory purposes, we tested whether reporting varied with study characteristics, such as funding source or drug novelty.

Results:

Reporting varied widely within and across studies. Some practices were sporadically reported, including results of all planned tests (78% trials reporting), use of blinded histopathological assessment (43% trials reporting), biopsy dimensions (38% trials reporting), and description of patient flow through PD analysis (62%). Pharmacodynamic analysis as a primary end point and mandatory biopsy had statistically significant positive relationships with overall quality of reporting. A preponderance of positive results (61% of the studies described positive PD results) suggests possible publication bias.

Conclusion:

Our results highlight the need for PD-reporting guidelines, and suggest several avenues for improving the risk/benefit for studies involving invasive, non-diagnostic tissue procurement.

Rationale for the design of an oncology trial using a generic targeted therapy multi‑drug regimen for NSCLC patients without treatment options (Review)

Despite more than 70 years of research concerning medication for cancer treatment, the disease still remains one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. Many cancer types lead to death within a period of months to years. The original class of chemotherapeutics is not selective for tumor cells and often has limited efficacy, while treated patients suffer from adverse side‑effects. To date, the concept of tumor‑specific targeted therapy drugs has not fulfilled its expectation to provide a key for a cure. Today, many oncology trials are designed using a combination of chemotherapeutics with targeted therapy drugs. However, these approaches have limited outcomes in most cancer indications. This perspective review provides a rationale to combine targeted therapy drugs for cancer treatment based on observations of evolutionary principles of tumor development and HIV infections. In both diseases, the mechanisms of immune evasion and drug resistance can be compared to some extent. However, only for HIV is a breakthrough treatment available, which is the highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). The principles of HAART and recent findings from cancer research were employed to construct a hypothetical model for cancer treatment with a multi‑drug regimen of targeted therapy drugs. As an example of this hypothesis, it is proposed to combine already marketed targeted therapy drugs against VEGFRs, EGFR, CXCR4 and COX2 in an oncology trial for non‑small cell lung cancer patients without further treatment options.

Biopsies: next-generation biospecimens for tailoring therapy

The majority of samples in existing tumour biobanks are surgical specimens of primary tumours. Insights into tumour biology, such as intratumoural heterogeneity, tumour-host crosstalk, and the evolution of the disease during therapy, require biospecimens from the primary tumour and those that reflect the patient's disease in specific contexts. Next-generation 'omics' technologies facilitate deep interrogation of tumours, but the characteristics of the samples can determine the ultimate accuracy of the results. The challenge is to biopsy tumours, in some cases serially over time, ensuring that the samples are representative, viable, and adequate both in quantity and quality for subsequent molecular applications. The collection of next-generation biospecimens, tumours, and blood samples at defined time points during the disease trajectory--either for discovery research or to guide clinical decisions--presents additional challenges and opportunities. From an organizational perspective, it also requires new additions to the multidisciplinary therapeutic team, notably interventional radiologists, molecular pathologists, and bioinformaticians. In this Review, we describe the existing procedures for sample procurement and processing of next-generation biospecimens, and highlight the issues involved in this endeavour, including the ethical, logistical, scientific, informational, and financial challenges accompanying next-generation biobanking.

Selecting the best drugs for phase I clinical development and beyond

Attrition rates of drugs from human entry to regulatory approval are far higher in anticancer drugs than those for nononcology indications. In the era of molecular therapeutics that results from a deeper understanding in cancer biology and advancing technologies, the number of compounds available for clinical testing is likely to continue to increase. Although the main objectives of phase I trials are to characterize toxicities of new agents and to determine the recommended dose for phase II development, most phase I studies are now designed to provide some early signal on preliminary efficacy as secondary objectives. The "go-no-go" decision to further develop a drug, or not, is now often pushed forward to the phase I setting. Thus, there is a need for investigators to be able to critically review the preclinical data available in order to determine which drugs should advance on the developmental path. This review highlights the intrinsic characteristics of a drug and the relevant data to be collected during its preclinical assessment, which may maximize the chances of success in clinical testing and eventual regulatory approval.

Use of research biopsies in clinical trials: are risks and benefits adequately discussed?

PURPOSE

Although the incorporation of research biopsies into clinical trials is increasing, limited information is available about how study protocols and informed consents integrate and describe their use.

METHODS

All therapeutic clinical trials in which image-guided research biopsies were performed from January 1, 2005, to October 1, 2010, were identified from an interventional radiology database. Data from study protocols and informed consents were extracted and analyzed. Procedural complications were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 57 clinical trials were identified, of which 38 (67%) contained at least one mandatory biopsy. The analysis of the research biopsy tumor tissue was a study end point in 95% of trials. The primary indication for a research biopsy was for integral biomarker analysis in 32% and for correlative science in 68% of trials. A statistical analytic plan for the correlative science research biopsy tumor tissue was mentioned in 26%, described as exploratory in 51%, and not mentioned in 23% of trials. For studies with mandatory biopsies, biopsy was an eligibility criterion in 71% of trials, and a statistical justification for the research biopsy sample size was present in 50% of trials. A total of 745 research biopsies were performed on 576 patients. Overall and major complication rates were 5.2% (39 of 745 biopsies) and 0.8% (six of 745 biopsies), respectively. Complication rates for intrathoracic and abdominal/pelvic solid organ biopsies were 17.1% (36 of 211 biopsies) and 1.6% (three of 189 biopsies), respectively. Site-stratified research biopsy-related risks were discussed in five consents.

CONCLUSION

A better representation of the risks and benefits of research biopsies in study protocols and informed consents is needed.

Overcoming implementation challenges of personalized cancer therapy

Personalized cancer therapy is based on the precept that detailed molecular characterization of the patient's tumour and its microenvironment will enable tailored therapies to improve outcomes and decrease toxicity. The goal of personalized therapy is to target aberrations that drive tumour growth and survival, by administering the right drug combination for the right person. This is becoming increasingly achievable with advances in high-throughput technologies to characterize tumours and the expanding repertoire of molecularly targeted therapies. However, there are numerous challenges that need to be surpassed before delivering on the promise of personalized cancer therapy. These include tumour heterogeneity and molecular evolution, costs and potential morbidity of biopsies, lack of effective drugs against most genomic aberrations, technical limitations of molecular tests, and reimbursement and regulatory hurdles. Critically, the 'hype' surrounding personalized cancer therapy must be tempered with realistic expectations, which, today, encompass increased survival times for only a portion of patients.

Sequential research-related biopsies in phase I trials: acceptance, feasibility and safety

BACKGROUND

Sequential tumour biopsies are of potential interest for the rational development of molecular targeted therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From June 2004 to July 2009, 186 patients participated in 14 phase I clinical trials in which sequential tumour biopsies (13 trials) and/or sequential normal skin biopsies (6 trials) were optional. All patients had to sign an independent informed consent for the biopsies.

RESULTS

Tumour biopsies were proposed to 155 patients and 130 (84%) signed the consent while normal skin biopsies were proposed to 70 patients and 57 (81%) signed the consent. Tumour biopsies could not be carried out in 41 (31%) of the 130 consenting patients. Tumour biopsies were collected at baseline in 33 patients, at baseline and under treatment in 56 patients. Tumour biopsies were obtained using an 18-gauge needle, under ultrasound or computed tomography guidance. Only nine minor complications were recorded. Most tumour biopsy samples collected were intended for ancillary molecular studies including protein or gene expression analysis, comparative genomic hybridization array or DNA sequencing. According to the results available, 70% of the biopsy samples met the quality criteria of each study and were suitable for ancillary studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, the majority of the patients accepted skin biopsies as well as tumour biopsies. Sequential tumour and skin biopsies are feasible and safe during early-phase clinical trials, even when patients are exposed to anti-angiogenic agents. The real scientific value of such biopsies for dose selection in phase I trials has yet to be established.

Biomarkers of cell death applicable to early clinical trials

The development of biomarkers of cell death to reflect tumor biology and drug-induced response has garnered interest with the development of several classes of drugs aimed at decreasing the cellular threshold for apoptosis and exploiting pre-existing oncogenic stresses. These novel anticancer drugs, directly targeted to the apoptosis regulatory machinery and aimed at abrogating survival signaling pathways, are entering early clinical trials provoking the question of how to monitor their impact on cancer patients. The parallel development of drugs with predictive biomarkers and their incorporation into early clinical trials are anticipated to support the pharmacological audit trail, to speed the development and reduce the attrition rate of novel drugs whose objective is to provoke tumor cell death. Tumor biopsies are an ideal matrix to measure apoptosis, but surrogate less invasive biomarkers such as blood samples and functional imaging are less challenging to acquire clinically. Archetypal and exploratory examples illustrating the importance of biomarkers to drug development are given. This review explores the substantive challenges associated with the validation, deployment, interpretation and utility of biomarkers of cell death and reviews recent advances in their incorporation in preclinical and early clinical trial contexts.

Drug development and clinical trials--the path to an approved cancer drug

Advances in our understanding of cancer biology have led to the discovery of a spectrum of new therapeutic targets. However, despite remarkable progress in the identification and characterization of novel mechanisms of the oncogenic process, the success rate for approval of oncology drugs remains low relative to other therapeutic areas. Innovative preclinical and clinical approaches, such as the use of advanced genomic technologies, as well as branched adaptive clinical trial designs, have the potential to accelerate the development and approval of highly effective oncology drugs, along with a matching diagnostic test to identify those patients most likely to benefit from the new treatment. To maximize the effectiveness of these new strategies, close collaboration between academic, industry, and regulatory agencies will be required. In this Review, we highlight new approaches in preclinical and clinical drug development that will help accelerate approval of drugs, and aim to provide more-effective treatments alongside companion diagnostic tests to ensure the right treatment is given to the right patient.

Improving the outcomes: developing cancer therapeutics

Oncology therapeutics are less likely to reach the market than other therapeutics, at a higher cost, and only approximately one in ten cancer drugs in clinical development actually reach the market. To improve, there need to be new approaches to oncology research and development, based on understanding cancer biology and improving preclinical models and clinical trials, such as more use of biomarkers and evaluation of other targets including cancer stem cells and use of combination therapies. Biomarkers can be used to make early go/no-go decisions in drug development and can speed up drug development by selecting patients who will benefit and excluding patients likely to experience severe side effects, but they need validation before use. New approaches to preclinical and clinical trials can also speed up and improve the development of cancer therapeutics.

Clinically relevant study end points in rectal cancer

In rectal cancer currently there are no clearly validated early end points which can serve as surrogates for long-term clinical outcome such as local control and survival. However, the use of a variety of response rates (i.e. pathological complete response, downsizing the primary tumor, tumor regression grade (TRG), radiological response) as endpoints in early (phase II) clinical trials is common since objective response to therapy is an early indication of activity. Disease-free survival (DFS) has been proposed as the most appropriate end point in adjuvant trials and is one of the most frequently used in newer rectal cancer trials. Due to the devastating nature of local recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer, local control (which is itself a subset of the overall DFS endpoint) is still considered an important endpoint. Recently, circumferential resection margin (CRM) has been proposed as novel early end point because the CRM status can account for effects on DFS and overall survival after chemoradiation, radiation (RT), or surgery alone. Consensus is needed to define the most appropriate end points in both early and phase III trials in locally advanced cancer.