Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Patient Benefit and Risk in Anticancer Drug Development: A Systematic Review of the Ixabepilone Trial Portfolio

View ORCID ProfileBenjamin Carlisle, James Mattina, Tiger Zheng, Jonathan Kimmelman
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/19003467
Benjamin Carlisle
aStudies of Translation, Ethics and Medicine (STREAM), Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, 3647 Peel Street, Montreal QC H3A 1X1
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Benjamin Carlisle
James Mattina
aStudies of Translation, Ethics and Medicine (STREAM), Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, 3647 Peel Street, Montreal QC H3A 1X1
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tiger Zheng
aStudies of Translation, Ethics and Medicine (STREAM), Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, 3647 Peel Street, Montreal QC H3A 1X1
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jonathan Kimmelman
aStudies of Translation, Ethics and Medicine (STREAM), Biomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University, 3647 Peel Street, Montreal QC H3A 1X1
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: jonathan.kimmelman@mcgill.ca
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To describe the patient burden and benefit, and the dynamics of trial success in the development of ixabepilone—a drug that was approved in the US but not in Europe.

DATA SOURCES Trials were captured by searching Embase and MEDLINE on July 27, 2015.

STUDY SELECTION Inclusion: 1) primary trial reports, 2) interventional trials, 3) human subjects, 4) phase 1 to phase 3, 5) trials of ixabepilone in monotherapy or combination therapy of 6) pre-licensure cancer indications. Exclusion: 1) secondary reports, 2) interim results, 3) meta-analyses, 4) retrospective/observational studies, 5) laboratory analyses (ex vivo tissues), 6) reviews, 7) letters, editorials, guidelines, interviews, abstract-only and poster presentations.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data were independently double-extracted and differences between coders were reconciled by discussion.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES We measured risk using the number of drug-related adverse events that were grade 3 or higher, benefit by objective response rate and trial outcomes by whether studies met their primary endpoint with acceptable safety.

RESULTS We identified 39 publications of ixabepilone monotherapy and 23 primary publications of combination therapy, representing 5615 patients and 1598 patient-years of involvement over 11 years and involving 17 different malignancies. In total, 830 patients receiving ixabepilone experienced objective tumour response (16%, 95% CI 12.5%–20.1%), and 74 died from drug-related toxicites (2.2%, 95% CI 1.6%–2.9%). Responding indications and combinations were identified very quickly; thereafter, the search for additional responding indications or combinations did not lead to labelling additions. A total of 11 “uninformative” trials were found, representing 27% of studies testing efficacy, 208 grade 3–4 events and 226 patient-years of involvement (21% and 26% of the portfolio total, respectively). After the European Medicines Agency rejected ixabepilone for licensing, all further trial activity involving ixabepilone was pursued outside of Europe.

DISCUSSION Risk/benefit for patients who enrolled in trials of non-approved indications of ixabepilone did not improve over the course of the drug’s development. Clinical value was discovered very quickly; however, a large fraction of trials were uninformative.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by CIHR (EOG111391).

Author Declarations

All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Not Applicable

Any clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.

Not Applicable

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

Data attached as supplementary materials

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 01, 2019.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Patient Benefit and Risk in Anticancer Drug Development: A Systematic Review of the Ixabepilone Trial Portfolio
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Patient Benefit and Risk in Anticancer Drug Development: A Systematic Review of the Ixabepilone Trial Portfolio
Benjamin Carlisle, James Mattina, Tiger Zheng, Jonathan Kimmelman
medRxiv 19003467; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/19003467
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Patient Benefit and Risk in Anticancer Drug Development: A Systematic Review of the Ixabepilone Trial Portfolio
Benjamin Carlisle, James Mattina, Tiger Zheng, Jonathan Kimmelman
medRxiv 19003467; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/19003467

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Medical Ethics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (160)
  • Allergy and Immunology (413)
  • Anesthesia (90)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (855)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (159)
  • Dermatology (97)
  • Emergency Medicine (248)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (393)
  • Epidemiology (8550)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (383)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1744)
  • Geriatric Medicine (167)
  • Health Economics (371)
  • Health Informatics (1237)
  • Health Policy (619)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (467)
  • Hematology (196)
  • HIV/AIDS (372)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10281)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (552)
  • Medical Education (192)
  • Medical Ethics (51)
  • Nephrology (210)
  • Neurology (1670)
  • Nursing (97)
  • Nutrition (248)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (325)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (450)
  • Oncology (926)
  • Ophthalmology (263)
  • Orthopedics (100)
  • Otolaryngology (172)
  • Pain Medicine (112)
  • Palliative Medicine (40)
  • Pathology (252)
  • Pediatrics (534)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (247)
  • Primary Care Research (207)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1764)
  • Public and Global Health (3832)
  • Radiology and Imaging (622)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (319)
  • Respiratory Medicine (520)
  • Rheumatology (207)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (165)
  • Sports Medicine (157)
  • Surgery (190)
  • Toxicology (36)
  • Transplantation (101)
  • Urology (74)