Developing biomarker-specific end points in lung cancer clinical trials
Abstract
In cancer-drug development, a number of different end points have been used to establish efficacy and support regulatory approval, such as overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and radiographic response rate. However, these traditional end points have important limitations. For example, in lung cancer clinical trials, evaluating overall survival end points is a protracted process and these end points are most reliable when crossover to the investigational therapy is not permitted. Furthermore, although radiographic surrogate end points, such as PFS and response rate, generally correlate with clinical benefit in the setting of cytotoxic chemotherapy and molecular targeted therapies, novel immunotherapies might have atypical response kinetics, which confounds radiographic interpretation. In this Review, we discuss the need to develop alternative or surrogate end points for lung cancer clinical trials, and focus on several new biomarkers that could serve as surrogate end points, including functional imaging biomarkers, circulating factors (tumour proteins, DNA, and cells), and pharmacodynamic tumour markers. By enabling the size, duration, and complexity of cancer trials to be reduced, biomarker end points hold the promise to accelerate drug development and improve patient outcomes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
NSCLC patient CTCs cannot always be reliably identified.
“While circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are considered a form of liquid biopsy, and we (31) and others (47) have reported on approaches for molecular analysis of CTCs, NSCLC patient CTCs cannot always be reliably identified (44, 48, 49).”
The growing number of targeted therapies for lung cancer has created a need for companion diagnostics that detect therapeutically targetable genetic lesions in real time.
“The ever-expanding number of targeted therapies available for lung cancer patient treatment has been accompanied by a need for companion diagnostics for real-time detection of therapeutically targetable genetic lesions (44, 45).”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 128 · Cited by 51
- Authors
- Neal, J. W., Gainor, J. F., & Shaw, A. T.
- Affiliations
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Shaw, Alice T.
- Venue
- Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2014-12-23
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 135-146
- ISSN
- 1759-4774 (ISSN-L)
- 1759-4782
- OpenAlex
- W2045363444
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 128
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5
- FWCI
- 0.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Lung Cancer Research Studies
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Keywords
- lung cancer, clinical trial endpoints, surrogate endpoints, overall survival, progression-free survival, circulating tumor DNA, circulating tumor cells, drug development
- MeSH terms
- Antineoplastic Agents, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Prognosis, Biomarkers, Tumor, Biomarkers, Treatment Outcome, Endpoint Determination
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review