» Articles » PMID: 35267440

Pharmacogenomics Testing in Phase I Oncology Clinical Trials: Constructive Criticism Is Warranted

Overview
Journal Cancers (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Oncology
Date 2022 Mar 10
PMID 35267440
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

While over ten-thousand phase I studies are published in oncology, fewer than 1% of these studies stratify patients based on genetic variants that influence pharmacology. Pharmacogenetics-based patient stratification can improve the success of clinical trials by identifying responsive patients who have less potential to develop toxicity; however, the scientific limits imposed by phase I study designs reduce the potential for these studies to make conclusions. We compiled all phase I studies in oncology with pharmacogenetics endpoints ( = 84), evaluating toxicity ( = 42), response or PFS ( = 32), and pharmacokinetics ( = 40). Most of these studies focus on a limited number of agent classes: Topoisomerase inhibitors, antimetabolites, and anti-angiogenesis agents. Eight genotype-directed phase I studies were identified. Phase I studies consist of homogeneous populations with a variety of comorbidities, prior therapies, racial backgrounds, and other factors that confound statistical analysis of pharmacogenetics. Taken together, phase I studies analyzed herein treated small numbers of patients (median, 95% CI = 28, 24-31), evaluated few variants that are known to change phenotype, and provided little justification of pharmacogenetics hypotheses. Future studies should account for these factors during study design to optimize the success of phase I studies and to answer important scientific questions.

Citing Articles

Pharmacogenomics in clinical trials: an overview.

Nogueiras-Alvarez R Front Pharmacol. 2023; 14:1247088.

PMID: 37927590 PMC: 10625420. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1247088.

References
1.
Danson S, Johnson P, Ward T, Dawson M, Denneny O, Dickinson G . Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the bioreductive drug RH1. Ann Oncol. 2011; 22(7):1653-1660. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdq638. View

2.
Font A, Salazar R, Maurel J, Taron M, Ramirez J, Tabernero J . Cisplatin plus weekly CPT-11/docetaxel in advanced esophagogastric cancer: a phase I study with pharmacogenetic assessment of XPD, XRCC3 and UGT1A1 polymorphisms. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2008; 62(6):1075-83. DOI: 10.1007/s00280-008-0700-3. View

3.
Bins S, Huitema A, Laven P, El Bouazzaoui S, Yu H, Van Erp N . Impact of CYP3A4*22 on Pazopanib Pharmacokinetics in Cancer Patients. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2018; 58(5):651-658. PMC: 6451710. DOI: 10.1007/s40262-018-0719-5. View

4.
Faivre S, Olszanski A, Weigang-Kohler K, Riess H, Cohen R, Wang X . Phase I dose escalation and pharmacokinetic evaluation of two different schedules of LY2334737, an oral gemcitabine prodrug, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Invest New Drugs. 2015; 33(6):1206-16. DOI: 10.1007/s10637-015-0286-7. View

5.
Singer J, Shou Y, Giles F, Kantarjian H, Hsu Y, Robeva A . UGT1A1 promoter polymorphism increases risk of nilotinib-induced hyperbilirubinemia. Leukemia. 2007; 21(11):2311-5. DOI: 10.1038/sj.leu.2404827. View