Ratain, Mark J.

Abstract Background and Aims: Cancer and Leukemia Group B 80303 was a randomized, phase III study in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer treated with gemcitabine plus either bevacizumab or placebo. We prospectively collected germline DNA and conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) using overall survival (OS) as the endpoint. Experimental Design: DNA from 351 patients was genotyped for more than 550,000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). Associations between OS and SNPs were investigated using the log-linear 2-way multiplicative Cox proportional hazards model. The subset of 294 genetically European patients was used for the primary analysis. Results: A nonsynonymous SNP in interleukin (IL)17F (rs763780, H161R) and an intronic SNP in strong linkage disequilibrium (rs7771466) were associated with OS using genome-wide criteria (P ≤ 10−7). Median OS was significantly shorter (P = 2.61 × 10−8) for the rs763780 heterozygotes [3.1 months; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.3–4.3] than for the patients without this variant (6.8 months; 95% CI, 5.8–7.3). After adjustment by stratification factors, the P value for the association was 9.51 × 10−7. Conclusions: The variant 161R form of IL-17F is a natural antagonist of the antiangiogenic effects of wild-type 161H IL-17F, and angiogenesis may play an important role in the metastatic spread of pancreatic cancer. In this preliminary study, we hypothesize that the angiogenetic potential of pancreatic cancers in patients with variant IL-17F is higher than that of tumors in patients with wild-type IL-17F, conferring worse prognosis. This exploratory GWAS may provide the foundation for testing the biology and clinical effects of novel genes and their heritable variants through mechanistic and confirmatory studies in pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 18(2); 577–84. ©2011 AACR.

Abstract The optimal design of phase II studies continues to be the subject of vigorous debate, especially studies of newer molecularly targeted agents. The observations that many new therapeutics “fail” in definitive phase III studies, coupled with the numbers of new agents to be tested as well as the increasing costs and complexity of clinical trials, further emphasize the critical importance of robust and efficient phase II design. The Clinical Trial Design Task Force (CTD-TF) of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Investigational Drug Steering Committee (IDSC) has published a series of discussion papers on phase II trial design in Clinical Cancer Research. The IDSC has developed formal recommendations about aspects of phase II trial design that are the subject of frequent debate, such as endpoints (response versus progression-free survival), randomization (single-arm designs versus randomization), inclusion of biomarkers, biomarker-based patient enrichment strategies, and statistical design (e.g., two-stage designs versus multiple-group adaptive designs). Although these recommendations in general encourage the use of progression-free survival as the primary endpoint, randomization, inclusion of biomarkers, and incorporation of newer designs, we acknowledge that objective response as an endpoint and single-arm designs remain relevant in certain situations. The design of any clinical trial should always be carefully evaluated and justified based on characteristic specific to the situation. Clin Cancer Res; 16(6); 1764–9