Oral Anticancer Drugs: How Limited Dosing Options and Dose Reductions May Affect Outcomes in Comparative Trials and Efficacy in Patients
Open Access
- 20 May 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Vol. 32 (15), 1620-1629
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.53.0204
Abstract
Historically, cancer medicine has avoided the problem of unequal dosing by comparing maximum-tolerated doses of intravenous regimens with proportionate dose reductions for toxicity. However, in recent years, with the development of numerous oral anticancer agents, dosing options are arbitrarily and increasingly limited by the size of pills. We contend that an underappreciated consequence of pill size is unequal dosing in comparative clinical trials and that this can have an impact on outcomes. We discuss how comparative effectiveness trials can be unbalanced and how the use of doses that are not sustainable might affect outcomes, especially marginal ones. We further argue that because of their poor tolerability and their limited dosing options, which often result in large dose adjustments in response to toxicity, the real-world clinical effectiveness of oral anticancer agents may be diminished and may not emulate results achieved in registration trials.Keywords
This publication has 104 references indexed in Scilit:
- Vandetanib in locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer: a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trialThe Lancet Oncology, 2012
- Vandetanib in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Medullary Thyroid Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind Phase III TrialJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2012
- Comparative effectiveness of axitinib versus sorafenib in advanced renal cell carcinoma (AXIS): a randomised phase 3 trialThe Lancet, 2011
- Sorafenib with interleukin-2 vs sorafenib alone in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: the ROSORC trialBritish Journal of Cancer, 2011
- Eribulin monotherapy versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with metastatic breast cancer (EMBRACE): a phase 3 open-label randomised studyThe Lancet, 2011
- Inhibition of Mutated, Activated BRAF in Metastatic MelanomaNew England Journal of Medicine, 2010
- Phase II study of sunitinib as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancerInvestigational New Drugs, 2010
- A phase II study of sorafenib in advanced uterine carcinoma/carcinosarcoma: A trial of the Chicago, PMH, and California Phase II ConsortiaGynecologic Oncology, 2010
- Phase III randomized trial of sunitinib versus capecitabine in patients with previously treated HER2-negative advanced breast cancerBreast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2010
- A clinical phase II study with sorafenib in patients with progressive hormone-refractory prostate cancer: a study of the CESAR Central European Society for Anticancer Drug Research-EWIVBritish Journal of Cancer, 2007