Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / March 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

There are 4 different types of clinical trials

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
J - 01 Mar 2005 10:38 GMT
http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/help/default.asp?page=73
There are 4 different types of clinical trials. These are called phase 1,
2, 3 and 4.

Phase 1 (phase I)

These are the earliest trials in the life of a new drug or treatment. They
are usually small trials, recruiting anything up to 30 patients (often a
lot less). The trial may be open to people with any type of cancer.

When laboratory testing shows a new treatment might help treat cancer,
phase 1 trials are done to find out

   * The safe dose range
   * The side effects
   * How the body copes with the drug
   * If the treatment shrinks cancer

The first patient to take part will be given a very small dose of the
drug. If all goes well, the next person will get a slightly higher dose.
With each patient taking part, the dose will gradually be increased and
the effect that has will be monitored. Any side effects will be recorded.
In a phase 1 trial, you may have lots of blood tests, as the researchers
look at how the drug is affecting you. And at how your body copes with,
and gets rid of the drug.

People entering phase 1 trials often have advanced cancer and have usually
had all the treatment available to them.  This is because they may benefit
from the new treatment in the trial, but many won't.  The aim of the trial
is to look at doses and side effects.  This work has to be done first,
before we can test the potential new treatment to see if it works.  Phase
1 trials are important because they are the first step in finding new
treatments for the future.

Phase 2 trials (phase II)

About 70 out of every 100 new treatments tested at phase 1 make it to
phase 2 trials. These trials may be done on people who all have same type
of cancer, or with several different types of cancer. Phase 2 trials are
done to find out

   * If the new treatment works well enough to test in phase 3
   * Which types of cancer it is effective against
   * More about side effects and how to manage them
   * More about the most effective dose to use

Although these treatments have been tested at phase 1, you may still have
side effects that are not known about. Drugs can affect people in
different ways.

Phase 2 trials are often larger than phase 1. There may be up to 50 people
taking part. If the results of phase 2 trials show that a new treatment
may be as good as existing treatment, or better, it then moves to phase 3.

Phase 3 (phase III)

These trials compare new treatments with the best currently available
treatment (the standard treatment). They may compare

   * A completely new treatment with the standard treatment
   * Different doses or ways of giving a standard treatment
   * A new radiotherapy schedule with the standard one

Phase 3 trials are usually much larger than phase 1 or 2. This is because
differences in success rates may be small. So, you would need very many
results to show the difference.

For example, 6% more people get a remission with a new treatment compared
to standard treatment. If a phase 3 trial gave the new treatment to 50
people and the standard treatment to 50, on average, there may be 3 more
remissions in the new treatment group. The 2 groups would not look that
different. If they gave each treatment to 5,000 people, there could be 300
more remissions in the new treatment group.

Sometimes phase 3 trials involve thousands of patients in many different
hospitals and even different countries.

Randomisation

Phase 3 trials are usually randomised. This means the researchers put the
people taking part into 2 groups at random. One group gets the new
treatment and the other the standard treatment.  There is more about
randomisation and types of trials on the next page in this section.

Overviews

Trial overviews are studies that combine all the results from phase 3
trials of a new treatment. They are sometimes called meta-analyses. The
idea is to get a broader picture of how well a treatment works. The more
data (information) you have, the more accurate the results are likely to
be.

Phase 4 (phase IV)
Phase 4 trials are done after a drug has been shown to work and has been
granted a license.  So they are looking at drugs that are already
available for doctors to prescribe, rather than new drugs that are still
being developed.

The main reasons pharmaceutical companies run phase 4 trials are to find
out

   * More about the side effects and safety of the drug
   * What the long term risks and benefits are
   * How well the drug works when it’s used more widely than in clinical
trials

There is more information about the different phases of clinical trials on
the website of The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry
(ABPI). http://www.abpi.org.uk//publications/briefings/clinical_brief.pdf
(Adobe Acrobat file)
LB@notmine.com - 01 Mar 2005 11:23 GMT
> http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/help/default.asp?page=73
> There are 4 different types of clinical trials. These are called phase 1,
[quoted text clipped - 106 lines]
> (ABPI). http://www.abpi.org.uk//publications/briefings/clinical_brief.pdf
> (Adobe Acrobat file)

A couple of questions
Does all of that apply to the USA as it does to the UK?
What incentive does pharma have to do phase 4 since they are now making money
- witness Vioxx mess?

Thanks for the post.

LB
J - 02 Mar 2005 11:50 GMT
> > http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/help/default.asp?page=73

> Phase 4 trials are done after a drug has been shown to work and has been
> granted a license.  So they are looking at drugs that are already available for
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>     * How well the drug works when it’s used more widely than in clinical
> trials[...]

Okay, so this is what Steph said in relation to the above website
"Phase 2 trials, by the way, are really more about investigating the toxicity,
rather than effectiveness. "

> A couple of questions
> Does all of that apply to the USA as it does to the UK?
> What incentive does pharma have to do phase 4 since they are now making money

Well, it looks to me (and don't quote me) that the pharmaceutical are still
concerned about getting it right (about side effects and risks/benefits. In the
meantime, the medicine can get fast-tracked by the FDA based on Phase III trials,
which I think is what happened with Vioxx.  By the way, as far as I know, Vioxx
has not been pulled from Canada. Too few incidences to blame (direct causation)
the medicine is, I think, what I read and/or pending incoming information.

Apparently doctors can prescribe after Phase III and licensing. (according to the
UK website)

Are those UK criteria same as US?
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/
They explain different types.
But under phases, it sure looks like same for Phase II (to me).
They word it differently.

"In Phase II trials, the experimental study drug or treatment is given to a
larger group of people (100-300) to see if it is effective and to further
evaluate its safety."  This is what I view as "glossing over and/or making it
more psychogically convincing".
Steph calls it "investigating the toxicity", they (US) call it "further evaluate
it's safety".

from NIH "In Phase IV trials, post marketing studies delineate additional
information including the drug's risks, benefits, and optimal use."  So there's
still incentive IMO to continue with the trials.
Also, anticipation, getting in for free trials, there's word of mouth, which
comes out of trials.
Also there's new (potential) niches from where they originally thought the new
chemo would help.
In other words, they decide to test them for other types of cancers.  So the
momentum grows....
I saw this happen with Erbitux, yet not a word (here) in the past year from
patients. I don't know why, except that now it's being considered for other
cancers.... I would have to be a "fly on the wall" on the ACOR colorectal cancer
list to maybe know what is going on with that.

I don't know if your question's been answered, but thanks for the interesting
questions.
When I look at individual clinical trials, I look to see who's funding them,
where they're located, competing interests.
I sure wish we (the public) had access to full details of results of clinical
trials.
J
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.