FDA–AACR Strategies for Optimizing Dosages for Oncology Drug Products: Selecting Optimized Dosages for Registrational Trials

The MTD has historically been the recommended phase II dose, and this dosage has typically been evaluated in registrational clinical trials for oncology drugs. With the emergence of targeted therapies, this approach may lead to the investigation of unnecessarily high dosages that elicit additional toxicity without added benefit. The utilization of innovative trial designs and model-informed approaches during clinical development can potentially lead to more informed dosage selection. Exposure-response analyses, clinical utility index, and other model-informed approaches have been successfully applied to understand preliminary activity and safety data for various classes of modern oncology drugs, providing insights to support the proposed dosage(s) for the registrational trial. Seamless trial designs have also played an important role in dosage selection by leveraging preplanned flexibilities and statistical procedures to increase efficiency during the conduct of trials. Critically, both approaches can be fit for purpose, allowing for adaptation and the usage of the totality of relevant clinical and nonclinical data. Despite this, the evaluation of MTD remains prevalent in registrational trials. This article, the third in a series of three describing best-practice approaches to dosage optimization in oncology drug development, highlights successful applications of and relevant considerations for innovative trial designs and model-based approaches to aid the selection of better optimized dosages for evaluation in registrational clinical trials.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Cancer Research
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-25-0098
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

FDA–AACR Strategies for Optimizing Dosages for Oncology Drug Products: Selecting Optimized Dosages for Registrational Trials

Scott Van Wart, Brad A. Davidson, Geoffrey R. Oxnard, Jiang Liu et al.
1 citations
Clinical Cancer Research
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
2.63
article

FDA–AACR Strategies for Optimizing Dosages for Oncology Drug Products: Selecting Optimized Dosages for Registrational Trials

Scott Van Wart, Brad A. Davidson, Geoffrey R. Oxnard, Jiang Liu, Patricia LoRusso, Stacy S. Shord, Jin Y. Jin, Cong Chen, Sarah K. Martin
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The MTD has historically been the recommended phase II dose, and this dosage has typically been evaluated in registrational clinical trials for oncology drugs. With the emergence of targeted therapies, this approach may lead to the investigation of unnecessarily high dosages that elicit additional toxicity without added benefit. The utilization of innovative trial designs and model-informed approaches during clinical development can potentially lead to more informed dosage selection. Exposure-response analyses, clinical utility index, and other model-informed approaches have been successfully applied to understand preliminary activity and safety data for various classes of modern oncology drugs, providing insights to support the proposed dosage(s) for the registrational trial. Seamless trial designs have also played an important role in dosage selection by leveraging preplanned flexibilities and statistical procedures to increase efficiency during the conduct of trials. Critically, both approaches can be fit for purpose, allowing for adaptation and the usage of the totality of relevant clinical and nonclinical data. Despite this, the evaluation of MTD remains prevalent in registrational trials. This article, the third in a series of three describing best-practice approaches to dosage optimization in oncology drug development, highlights successful applications of and relevant considerations for innovative trial designs and model-based approaches to aid the selection of better optimized dosages for evaluation in registrational clinical trials.

Clinical Cancer ResearchVol. 31(23)
Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US), Boston Medical Center (US), United States Food and Drug Administration (US), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (US), Eli Lilly (United States) (US), American Association For Cancer Research (US), Yale Cancer Center (US), Yale University (US), Institute for Clinical Pharmacodynamics (United States) (US), Merck Institute for Science Education (US), Kaiser Permanente South San Francisco Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
2.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.