Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Clinical Trials of Solid Tumor Drugs Approved in Europe: Evidence-Based-Medicine

View through CrossRef
The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) were introduced to determine response to therapy by evaluation of change from baseline while on the treatment of the solid tumor. These criteria are used mainly in clinical trials where tumor objective response (tumor shrinkage) or disease progression is the primary endpoint. RECIST is widely used by academic institutions, cooperative groups, and industry for oncology clinical trials. Regulatory authorities use RECIST as an appropriate guideline for risk-benefit assessments of oncology drugs. This study aimed to assess the impact on pivotal clinical trial designs due to adopting the RECIST for assessing the risk-benefit ratio for oncology drugs approved in Europe for treatment of solid tumors (2000–2019). The Summary of Product Characteristics for all oncology drugs was reviewed to identify the pivotal clinical trials. Results: There were 78 pivotal clinical trials for 38 oncology drugs approved, by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), for treatment of solid tumors. Open-label randomized controlled trials (RCTs) account for 62.82% of the pivotal clinical trials compared to 37.18% blinded RCTs. A total of 6,721 patients (average=1,120) participated in 78 pivotal clinical trials. Around sixty-three percent (4,211 out of 6,721) of patients participated in blinded RCTs, and 37.34% (2,510 out of 6,721) of patients participated in open-label RCTs. Conclusion: Less restrictive rules for oncology drugs approval were applied by the regulatory agency. Over 19 years, EMA had approved oncology drugs based on open-label trials, especially when an oncology drug was compared to an active comparator, with results of few or no clinical improvement over existing therapy. The approval process of oncology drugs should be supported by clear evidence about the clinical effects of the new oncology drugs compared to the existing effective oncology therapies using clinical trial designs that are methodologically rigorous.
Title: Clinical Trials of Solid Tumor Drugs Approved in Europe: Evidence-Based-Medicine
Description:
The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) were introduced to determine response to therapy by evaluation of change from baseline while on the treatment of the solid tumor.
These criteria are used mainly in clinical trials where tumor objective response (tumor shrinkage) or disease progression is the primary endpoint.
RECIST is widely used by academic institutions, cooperative groups, and industry for oncology clinical trials.
Regulatory authorities use RECIST as an appropriate guideline for risk-benefit assessments of oncology drugs.
This study aimed to assess the impact on pivotal clinical trial designs due to adopting the RECIST for assessing the risk-benefit ratio for oncology drugs approved in Europe for treatment of solid tumors (2000–2019).
The Summary of Product Characteristics for all oncology drugs was reviewed to identify the pivotal clinical trials.
Results: There were 78 pivotal clinical trials for 38 oncology drugs approved, by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), for treatment of solid tumors.
Open-label randomized controlled trials (RCTs) account for 62.
82% of the pivotal clinical trials compared to 37.
18% blinded RCTs.
A total of 6,721 patients (average=1,120) participated in 78 pivotal clinical trials.
Around sixty-three percent (4,211 out of 6,721) of patients participated in blinded RCTs, and 37.
34% (2,510 out of 6,721) of patients participated in open-label RCTs.
Conclusion: Less restrictive rules for oncology drugs approval were applied by the regulatory agency.
Over 19 years, EMA had approved oncology drugs based on open-label trials, especially when an oncology drug was compared to an active comparator, with results of few or no clinical improvement over existing therapy.
The approval process of oncology drugs should be supported by clear evidence about the clinical effects of the new oncology drugs compared to the existing effective oncology therapies using clinical trial designs that are methodologically rigorous.

Related Results

Complex Collision Tumors: A Systematic Review
Complex Collision Tumors: A Systematic Review
Abstract Introduction: A collision tumor consists of two distinct neoplastic components located within the same organ, separated by stromal tissue, without histological intermixing...
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Abstract Introduction Tarlatamab is a Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) -directed bispecific T-cell engager recently approved for use in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer (SCL...
Pembrolizumab and Sarcoma: A meta-analysis
Pembrolizumab and Sarcoma: A meta-analysis
Abstract Introduction: Pembrolizumab is a monoclonal antibody that promotes antitumor immunity. This study presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety...
Giant Sacrococcygeal Teratoma in Infant: Systematic Review
Giant Sacrococcygeal Teratoma in Infant: Systematic Review
Abstract Introduction Sacrococcygeal teratoma (SCT) is a rare embryonal tumor that occurs in the sacrococcygeal region, with an incidence of about 1 in 35,000 to 40,000 live births...
Hyalinizing Trabecular Tumor: A Case Series with Literature Review
Hyalinizing Trabecular Tumor: A Case Series with Literature Review
Abstract Introduction: Hyalinizing trabecular tumor (HTT) is a rare thyroid neoplasm originating from follicular cells and poses diagnostic challenges due to its cytologic and hist...
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
This review summarizes the evidence from six randomized controlled trials that judged the effectiveness of systematic review summaries on policymakers' decision making, or the most...
Carcinoma ex Pleomorphic Adenoma: A Case Series and Literature Review
Carcinoma ex Pleomorphic Adenoma: A Case Series and Literature Review
Abstract Introduction Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma (CXPA) is a rare malignant salivary gland tumor that can lead to severe complications and carries a risk of distant metastasi...

Back to Top