The Phase II/III transition toward the proof of efficacy in cancer clinical trials

Melissa Fazzari, Glenn Heller, Howard I. Scher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

35 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Few phase III investigations show a benefit for an experimental treatment when compared to a standard therapy or placebo. This illustrates the need for more reliable estimates of treatment effects from the phase II investigations used to design the more definitive phase III trials. In this manuscript, we examine four aspects of phase II clinical trial designs: (1) selecting endpoints; (2) defining the patient population for evaluation; (3) determining a level of activity that would justify a phase III trial; and (4) estimating sample sizes. In each area, problems with the conventional approaches are discussed and alternatives for the successful transition of phase II results to a phase III setting are suggested. An application of the design for patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer is illustrated. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:360-368 Copyright (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)360-368
Number of pages9
JournalControlled Clinical Trials
Volume21
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Clinical Trials
Neoplasms
Phase II Clinical Trials
Phase Transition
Sample Size
Androgens
Prostatic Neoplasms
Therapeutics
Placebos
Population

Keywords

  • Historical data
  • Patient population
  • Phase II
  • Sample size
  • Surrogate endpoint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology

Cite this

The Phase II/III transition toward the proof of efficacy in cancer clinical trials. / Fazzari, Melissa; Heller, Glenn; Scher, Howard I.

In: Controlled Clinical Trials, Vol. 21, No. 4, 08.2000, p. 360-368.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c04b0a3bc03f47de849a956f96f8b68a,
title = "The Phase II/III transition toward the proof of efficacy in cancer clinical trials",
abstract = "Few phase III investigations show a benefit for an experimental treatment when compared to a standard therapy or placebo. This illustrates the need for more reliable estimates of treatment effects from the phase II investigations used to design the more definitive phase III trials. In this manuscript, we examine four aspects of phase II clinical trial designs: (1) selecting endpoints; (2) defining the patient population for evaluation; (3) determining a level of activity that would justify a phase III trial; and (4) estimating sample sizes. In each area, problems with the conventional approaches are discussed and alternatives for the successful transition of phase II results to a phase III setting are suggested. An application of the design for patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer is illustrated. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:360-368 Copyright (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.",
keywords = "Historical data, Patient population, Phase II, Sample size, Surrogate endpoint",
author = "Melissa Fazzari and Glenn Heller and Scher, {Howard I.}",
year = "2000",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00056-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "360--368",
journal = "Controlled Clinical Trials",
issn = "0197-2456",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Phase II/III transition toward the proof of efficacy in cancer clinical trials

AU - Fazzari, Melissa

AU - Heller, Glenn

AU - Scher, Howard I.

PY - 2000/8

Y1 - 2000/8

N2 - Few phase III investigations show a benefit for an experimental treatment when compared to a standard therapy or placebo. This illustrates the need for more reliable estimates of treatment effects from the phase II investigations used to design the more definitive phase III trials. In this manuscript, we examine four aspects of phase II clinical trial designs: (1) selecting endpoints; (2) defining the patient population for evaluation; (3) determining a level of activity that would justify a phase III trial; and (4) estimating sample sizes. In each area, problems with the conventional approaches are discussed and alternatives for the successful transition of phase II results to a phase III setting are suggested. An application of the design for patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer is illustrated. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:360-368 Copyright (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.

AB - Few phase III investigations show a benefit for an experimental treatment when compared to a standard therapy or placebo. This illustrates the need for more reliable estimates of treatment effects from the phase II investigations used to design the more definitive phase III trials. In this manuscript, we examine four aspects of phase II clinical trial designs: (1) selecting endpoints; (2) defining the patient population for evaluation; (3) determining a level of activity that would justify a phase III trial; and (4) estimating sample sizes. In each area, problems with the conventional approaches are discussed and alternatives for the successful transition of phase II results to a phase III setting are suggested. An application of the design for patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer is illustrated. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:360-368 Copyright (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.

KW - Historical data

KW - Patient population

KW - Phase II

KW - Sample size

KW - Surrogate endpoint

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033919395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033919395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00056-8

DO - 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00056-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 10913810

AN - SCOPUS:0033919395

VL - 21

SP - 360

EP - 368

JO - Controlled Clinical Trials

JF - Controlled Clinical Trials

SN - 0197-2456

IS - 4

ER -