Abstract 673P
Background
The limitations of phase I dose-finding studies, aimed at identifying the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD), are well-known, especially in oncology where newer drugs exhibit different dose-toxicity relationships. This has shifted the focus from determining the MTD to finding the optimal dose. In 2021, the FDA launched Project Optimus, a framework designed to provide guidance for improving dose optimization during drug development. The framework outlines general requirements for dose optimization but has raised questions among sponsors designing or amending trials. This is largely because it emphasizes not only analyzing dose-limiting toxicities but also includes additional safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy endpoints. Our aim is to share our experience as statisticians in designing and conducting trials following the Project Optimus guidance. We hope to clarify common questions from sponsors, address perceived challenges, and accelerate the adoption of dose optimization.
Methods
Since the release of the Project Optimus draft guidance, we have supported the (re)design of several oncology clinical trials by offering statistical expertise in adaptive designs and innovative methodologies. We developed a new Bayesian method that incorporates multiple endpoints into dose optimization without alpha spending, providing a seamless inclusion in clinical trials.
Results
Drawing from our experience in designing phase 1/2 and phase 2/3 clinical trials and submitting protocols for regulatory approval, we present a statistical perspective on: - Practical implementation of Project Optimus in trials. - Statistical methodologies applicable to dose optimization. - Our approach to incorporating various safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy endpoints.
Conclusions
Dose optimization, rather than MTD identification, has become the gold standard in oncology drug development. While this shift presents design and analysis challenges, innovative statistical approaches can address them effectively. This presentation offers actionable information for sponsors from a statistician's viewpoint, aiming to simplify the implementation of dose optimization strategies.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
621P - Phase II trial of encorafenib and binimetinib (E+B) in patients (pts) with BRAF-altered advanced solid tumors: Results of E+B cohort in the BELIEVE trial (NCCH1901)
Presenter: Yoshitaka Honma
Session: Poster session 01
622P - Safety and efficacy of ifebemtinib (IN10018) combined with D-1553 in solid tumors with KRAS G12C mutation: Results from a phase Ib/II study
Presenter: Zhengbo Song
Session: Poster session 01
624P - Belvarafenib in patients (pts) with BRAF class II or III alteration-positive tumours: TAPISTRY study
Presenter: Rafal Dziadziuszko
Session: Poster session 01
625P - Initial results from the phase I, first-in-human study of the covalent, PI3Kα inhibitor TOS-358 in patients with solid tumors, expressing PI3Kα mutations or amplifications
Presenter: Marwan Fakih
Session: Poster session 01
626P - Roginolisib (IOA-244), a first oral allosteric modulator of phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor delta (PI3Kδ) in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma
Presenter: Anna Di Giacomo
Session: Poster session 01
627P - Long-term efficacy and safety of larotrectinib in non-primary central nervous system (CNS) TRK fusion cancer
Presenter: Alexander Drilon
Session: Poster session 01
628P - Efficacy and safety of larotrectinib as first-line treatment for patients (pts) with TRK fusion cancer: An updated analysis
Presenter: David Hong
Session: Poster session 01
629P - Phase I study of pamiparib and cabozantinib in patients with metastatic solid tumors harboring homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)
Presenter: Siqing Fu
Session: Poster session 01