help button home button The Oncologist
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Oncologist, Vol. 13, No. suppl_2, 27-31, April 2008; doi:10.1634/theoncologist.13-S2-27
© 2008 AlphaMed Press

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow eLetters: Submit a response to this article
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Reprints/Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Verweij, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Verweij, J.

Other Endpoints in Screening Studies for Soft Tissue Sarcomas

Jaap Verweij

Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Key Words. Soft tissue sarcoma • Phase II study • Endpoint • Biomarker

Correspondence: Jaap Verweij, M.D., Ph.D., Erasmus University Medical Center, Groene Hilledijk 301, 3075 EA Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Telephone: 31-10-4391338; Fax: 31-10-4391003; e-mail: j.verweij{at}erasmusmc.nl

Disclosure: No potential conflicts of interest were reported by the authors, planners, reviewers, or staff managers of this article.

Despite extensive research efforts over the past two decades to identify effective agents for the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas, few agents are available, and with modest utility. There is a high unmet medical need to develop novel therapies for the treatment of patients with soft tissue sarcomas. Clinical trials for soft tissue sarcomas should be optimally designed, and it is crucial that they identify and define the desired clinical outcome. Survival is often the ultimate endpoint; however, physiological and biological markers are often used to predict the potential therapeutic benefit of a new agent. These endpoints can be easily measured, but can lead to false-positive results and do not take into account the complicated nature of soft tissue sarcomas. Alternative endpoints that are currently being evaluated include the progression-free survival rate, time to progression, tumor growth rate, and progression arrest rate. This article discusses some of the limitations of current endpoint criteria and potential endpoint criteria that could be used to evaluate treatment options for patients with soft tissue sarcomas.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JCOHome page
G. D. Demetri, S. P. Chawla, M. von Mehren, P. Ritch, L. H. Baker, J. Y. Blay, K. R. Hande, M. L. Keohan, B. L. Samuels, S. Schuetze, et al.
Efficacy and Safety of Trabectedin in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma After Failure of Prior Anthracyclines and Ifosfamide: Results of a Randomized Phase II Study of Two Different Schedules
J. Clin. Oncol., September 1, 2009; 27(25): 4188 - 4196.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE ONCOLOGIST STEM CELLS CME ALPHAMED PRESS JOURNALS


Copyright © 2008 by AlphaMed Press.