Biomedical subjects

Caroline C Sigman

Publications and source records attributed to Caroline C Sigman.

14 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Imaging and oncologic drug development.

For decades anatomic imaging with computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging has facilitated drug development in medical oncology by providing quantifiable and objective evidence of response to cancer therapy. In recent years metabolic imaging with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography has added an important component to the oncologist's armamentarium for earlier detection of response that is now widely used and appreciated. These modalities along with ultrasound and optical imaging (bioluminescence, fluorescence, near-infrared imaging, multispectral imaging) have become used increasingly in preclinical studies in animal models to document the effects of genetic alterations on cancer progression or metastases, the detection of minimal residual disease, and response to various therapeutics including radiation, chemotherapy, or biologic agents. The field of molecular imaging offers potential to deliver a variety of probes that can image noninvasively drug targets, drug distribution, cancer gene expression, cell surface receptor or oncoprotein levels, and biomarker predictors of prognosis, therapeutic response, or failure. Some applications are best suited to accelerate preclinical anticancer drug development, whereas other technologies may be directly transferable to the clinic. Efforts are underway to apply noninvasive in vivo imaging to specific preclinical or clinical problems to accelerate progress in the field. Because resources are limited, and patient suffering from failed or ineffective therapy continues, a concerted effort is being made to address these issues. Many simultaneous activities involving academia; the pharmaceutical, device, and biotechnology industries; US Food and Drug Administration; National Cancer Institute; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; and specialized networks sponsored by the National Institutes of Health are beginning to address these issues to develop consensus recommendations and progress in this important area.

Drug Approval↗

PubMed2006

Progress in chemoprevention drug development: the promise of molecular biomarkers for prevention of intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer--a plan to move forward.

This article reviews progress in chemopreventive drug development, especially data and concepts that are new since the 2002 AACR report on treatment and prevention of intraepithelial neoplasia. Molecular biomarker expressions involved in mechanisms of carcinogenesis and genetic progression models of intraepithelial neoplasia are discussed and analyzed for how they can inform mechanism-based, molecularly targeted drug development as well as risk stratification, cohort selection, and end-point selection for clinical trials. We outline the concept of augmenting the risk, mechanistic, and disease data from histopathologic intraepithelial neoplasia assessments with molecular biomarker data. Updates of work in 10 clinical target organ sites include new data on molecular progression, significant completed trials, new agents of interest, and promising directions for future clinical studies. This overview concludes with strategies for accelerating chemopreventive drug development, such as integrating the best science into chemopreventive strategies and regulatory policy, providing incentives for industry to accelerate preventive drugs, fostering multisector cooperation in sharing clinical samples and data, and creating public-private partnerships to foster new regulatory policies and public education.

Biomarkers, Tumor↗

PubMed2005

The progress and promise of molecular imaging probes in oncologic drug development.

As addressed by the recent Food and Drug Administration Critical Path Initiative, tools are urgently needed to increase the speed, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of drug development for cancer and other diseases. Molecular imaging probes developed based on recent scientific advances have great potential as oncologic drug development tools. Basic science studies using molecular imaging probes can help to identify and characterize disease-specific targets for oncologic drug therapy. Imaging end points, based on these disease-specific biomarkers, hold great promise to better define, stratify, and enrich study groups and to provide direct biological measures of response. Imaging-based biomarkers also have promise for speeding drug evaluation by supplementing or replacing preclinical and clinical pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluations, including target interaction and modulation. Such analyses may be particularly valuable in early comparative studies among candidates designed to interact with the same molecular target. Finally, as response biomarkers, imaging end points that characterize tumor vitality, growth, or apoptosis can also serve as early surrogates of therapy success. This article outlines the scientific basis of oncology imaging probes and presents examples of probes that could facilitate progress. The current regulatory opportunities for new and existing probe development and testing are also reviewed, with a focus on recent Food and Drug Administration guidance to facilitate early clinical development of promising probes.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

PubMed2005

Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development.

2-[(18)F]Fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) assesses a fundamental property of neoplasia, the Warburg effect. This molecular imaging technique offers a complementary approach to anatomic imaging that is more sensitive and specific in certain cancers. FDG-PET has been widely applied in oncology primarily as a staging and restaging tool that can guide patient care. However, because it accurately detects recurrent or residual disease, FDG-PET also has significant potential for assessing therapy response. In this regard, it can improve patient management by identifying responders early, before tumor size is reduced; nonresponders could discontinue futile therapy. Moreover, a reduction in the FDG-PET signal within days or weeks of initiating therapy (e.g., in lymphoma, non-small cell lung, and esophageal cancer) significantly correlates with prolonged survival and other clinical end points now used in drug approvals. These findings suggest that FDG-PET could facilitate drug development as an early surrogate of clinical benefit. This article reviews the scientific basis of FDG-PET and its development and application as a valuable oncology imaging tool. Its potential to facilitate drug development in seven oncologic settings (lung, lymphoma, breast, prostate, sarcoma, colorectal, and ovary) is addressed. Recommendations include initial validation against approved therapies, retrospective analyses to define the magnitude of change indicative of response, further prospective validation as a surrogate of clinical benefit, and application as a phase II/III trial end point to accelerate evaluation and approval of novel regimens and therapies.

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18↗

PubMed2005

New science-based endpoints to accelerate oncology drug development.

Although several new oncology drugs have reached the market, more than 80% of drugs for all indications entering clinical development do not get marketing approval, with many failing late in development often in Phase III trials, because of unexpected safety issues or difficulty determining efficacy, including confounded outcomes. These factors contribute to the high costs of oncology drug development and clearly show the need for faster, more cost-effective strategies for evaluating oncology drugs and better definition of patients who will benefit from treatment. Remarkable advances in the understanding of neoplastic progression at the cellular and molecular levels have spurred the discovery of molecularly targeted drugs. This progress along with advances in imaging and bioassay technologies are the basis for describing and evaluating new biomarker endpoints as well as for defining other biomarkers for identifying patient populations, potential toxicity, and providing evidence of drug effect and efficacy. Definitions and classifications of these biomarkers for use in oncology drug development are presented in this paper. Science-based and practical criteria for validating biomarkers have been developed including considerations of mechanistic plausibility, available methods and technology, and clinical feasibility. New promising tools for measuring biomarkers have also been developed and are based on genomics and proteomics, direct visualisation by microscopy (e.g., confocal microscopy and computer-assisted image analysis of cellular features), nanotechnologies, and direct and remote imaging (e.g., fluorescence endoscopy and anatomical, functional and molecular imaging techniques). The identification and evaluation of potential surrogate endpoints and other biomarkers require access to and analysis of large amounts of data, new technologies and extensive research resources. Further, there is a requirement for a convergence of research, regulatory and drug developer thinking - an effort that will not be accomplished by individual scientists or research institutions. Research collaborations are needed to foster development of these new endpoints and other biomarkers and, in the United States (US), include ongoing efforts among the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Cancer Institute (NCI), academia, and industry.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

PubMed2004