The rise of immunotherapy has been meteoric — there are now well more than 1,000 immuno-oncology (IO) trials ongoing according to clinicaltrials.gov. Finding and enrolling the appropriate patients for these potentially revolutionary treatments has presented a profound challenge, one that was recently covered in the aptly titled New York Times article: A Cancer Conundrum: Too Many Drug Trials, Too Few Patients. Another piece of the puzzle is clinical trial design, which can be especially elaborate when testing combination treatments in IO. Exacerbating these issues, IO trials are an increasingly competitive race to market. There is great value assigned to reducing development times and being the first drug approved within a class or for a specific indication.
This blog article discusses the current state of immuno-oncology studies, strategies for enhancing patient recruitment, the role of companion diagnostics and solutions for dealing with the complexity of IO combination studies. Continue reading
The year I graduated from college was the same year an old family friend was retiring. He had spent the majority of his career designing and deploying farm equipment across the United States. When I asked for advice as I entered the workforce he told me a story.
Three months into retirement, a company in California asked him to fly out and consult with their mechanics on why a piece of equipment wasn’t working. He flew out, spent 5 minutes at the company’s site, drew an “X” in chalk on the equipment, and flew home. They called the next day and asked what they needed to do. He directed them to the “X”. As simple as an “X” is, it represented years of experience and understanding of the intricacies of the machine and what could potentially go wrong.
He said the moral of the story was, “It’s good to know where to put the X”. Continue reading
The accelerated arrival of novel vaccines and immunotherapies into the clinical space spurred the emergence of fields like personalized medicine, immuno-profiling and immuno-monitoring built around increasingly sophisticated testing platforms. Among them, immunoassays in the ELISpot (Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSpot) family are the most frequently used functional assays for single-cell analysis.1
Using 2017 data from Trialtrove (Citeline.com), we found that ELISpot assays were used in more than 160 open clinical trials (Figure 1). The main drivers for this rising clinical usage are:
- The increased prevalence of infectious and chronic diseases as the population ages in developed countries
- Extensive use of immunoassays in oncology new vaccines and immunotherapies
- Technological developments, such as test automation and rapid analysis
- Growth in the biotechnology sector
Our ongoing “Meet me in 5” series covers 5 people, topics or questions to illustrate how Covance nurtures exceptional people, provides an energized purpose and enables extraordinary potential in its employees’ careers.
In this article, Rob Davie, vice president & general manager, global clinical development at Covance, shares his thoughts on career ownership, the benefits of our global culture and our competitive advantage.
No two days are ever the same
Rob Davie didn’t originally plan to stay at Covance for 19 years and counting. He first joined Covance after working with a large pharmaceutical company and planned to eventually return to the pharma industry after gaining knowledge and experience with a global contract research organization (CRO). Continue reading
The majority of today’s approved companion (and complementary) diagnostics (CDx) support personalized medicine efforts in oncology, a testament to researchers’ growing knowledge regarding the genetic pathways impacted in various cancers. That understanding increases our ability to convert such knowledge of biology into treatments that specifically target disease based on a tumor’s genetic makeup. This has led to significantly improved outcomes for many patients.
But can we leverage the knowledge of the biology of other disease states along with the appropriate technical progress into successful CDx expansion beyond oncology? Given that nearly 50% of all compounds in clinical development are dropped for lack of efficacy, CDx may represent a viable approach to improve this statistic and boost the efficiency of drug development efforts. Promising clinical areas where CDx may play an important role include immunology, rare and orphan diseases, and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease. Continue reading
Diabetes frequently accompanies heart failure (HF) and HF is observed in up to 15% of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The relationship between diabetes and the heart is, however, complex. It has long been known that diabetes is an important risk factor for coronary artery disease, resultant myocardial ischemia and infarctions leading to HF. But the direct effect of diabetes on the heart muscle is less clear.
The existence of a non-ischemic diabetic cardiomyopathy, disease of the cardiac muscle that is directly related to diabetes and not due to coronary atherosclerosis, has been a longstanding topic for debate. The recent EMPAREG-OUTCOME study in which patient assignment to the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor, empagliflozin, was associated with a reduction in HF hospitalizations by 35%1 (for unclear reasons) has reignited this discussion.
As our industry approaches the one year anniversary of the implementation of SEND (Standard for the Exchange of Nonclinical Data) datasets as required by the FDA for regulatory submissions, attention is shifting to the next set of requirements. From recent notices to upcoming compliance dates, we’ve compiled five key highlights for your information that will also help you proactively prepare for the changes. Continue reading
A Trial Summary (TS) domain represents an essential part of standardizing study data for electronic submissions. In July 2016, the U.S. FDA issued version 3.1 of the Study Data Technical Conformance Guide, which advised including a TS domain to identify the study start date in the submission. In clinical studies, the study start date is earliest date of informed consent from any subject enrolled in the study, whereas nonclinical studies use the study initiation (protocol finalization) date. This article reviews the importance of the study start date and makes recommendations to help ensure a successful submission for current and legacy studies.
In the last 10 years, the study of medications for type 2 diabetes (T2D) has rapidly expanded its investigational footprint to evaluate cardiovascular (CV) effects, a shift driven largely by regulatory guidance that requires at least a demonstration of CV safety. Clinical investigators are also concerned with the effect diabetes medications have on atherosclerotic vascular outcomes as well as HF.
Working with Covance’s Dr. Jonathan Plehn in the webinar The Diabetic Heart: A Focus On Heart Failure, I recently provided a high-level overview of the clinical outcomes data examining the effect of antihyperglycemic therapies on heart failure (HF).
Only a handful of trials1 have analyzed more versus less-intensive glycemic control with regards to the effects on HF. In the ACCORD trial, there was a trend for increased risk with more intense glucose control (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97-1.57). In contrast, the UKPDS, ADVANCE and VADT trials suggested a favorable effect, although these results were not clinically relevant nor statistically significant. Meta-analysis of the totality of these data suggests there is essentially no effect, either positive or negative, on HF events with glycometabolic modulation using the older therapies available for T2D. Below, I review specific therapies in more detail. Continue reading
Covance employees working to support clinical trials recognize that they are helping to move medicine forward and improve healthcare, but sometimes the impact is much closer to home.
“A client of ours was testing a new formulation of a measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (MMRV) vaccine and needed to ensure the end product was safe in pediatric populations,” explained Joshua. The Phase IV study was running smoothly but needed a Clinical Research Associate (CRA). Joshua was thrilled to take on the study and build on his experience. Continue reading