Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Use of genomic signatures in therapeutics development in oncology and other diseases

The Pharmacogenomics Journal volume 6, pages 166–173 (2006)Cite this article

Abstract

Pharmacogenomics is the science of determining how the benefits and adverse effects of a drug vary among a target population of patients based on genomic features of the patient's germ line and diseased tissue. By identifying those patients who are most likely to respond while eliminating serious adverse effects, the therapeutic index of a drug can be substantially increased. This may facilitate demonstrating the effectiveness of the drug and may avoid subsequent problems due to serious adverse events. Our objective here is to provide clinical trial designs and analysis strategies for the utilization of genomic signatures as classifiers for patient stratification or patient selection in therapeutics development. We review methods for the development of genomic signature classifiers of treatment outcome in high-dimensional settings, where the number of variables available for prediction far exceeds the number of cases. The split-sample and crossvalidation methods for obtaining estimates of prediction accuracy in developmental studies are described. We present clinical trial designs for utilizing genomic signature classifiers in therapeutics development. The purpose of the classifier is to facilitate the identification of groups of patients with a high probability of benefiting from it and avoiding serious adverse events. We distinguish exploratory analysis during the development of the genomic classifier from prospective planning and rigorous testing of therapeutic hypotheses in studies that utilize the genomic classifier in therapeutics development. We discuss a variety of clinical trial designs including those utilizing specimen collection and assay prospectively for newly accrued patients and those involving a prospectively planned analysis of archived specimens from a previously conducted clinical trial. Our discussion of the development and use of classifiers of efficacy is mostly focused on applications in oncology using classifiers based on biomarkers measured in tumors. Some of the same considerations apply, however, to development of efficacy and safety classifiers in nononcologic diseases based on single-nucleotide germline polymorphisms.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN . Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. J Am Med Assoc 1998; 279: 1200–1205.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Evans BJ, Flockhart DA, Meslin EM . Creating incentives for genomic research to improve targeting of therapies. Nat Med 2004; 10 (12): 1289–1291.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Group BDW . Commentary: biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Therapeut 2001; 69 (3): 89–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tsai CA, Wang SJ, Chen DT, Chen JJ, Tsai CA . Sample size for gene expression microarray experiments. Bioinformatics 2004; 21: 1502–1508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Simon R . Diagnostic and prognostic prediction using gene expression profiles in high dimensional microarray data. Br J Cancer 2003; 89: 1599–1604.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Simon RM, Korn EL, McShane LM, Radmacher MD, Wright GW, Zhao Y . Design and Analysis of DNA Microarray Investigations. Springer: New York, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pusztai L, Hess KR . Clinical trial design for microarray predictive marker discovery and assessment. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1731–1737.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Dudoit S, Fridlyand J, Speed TP . Comparison of discrimination methods for classification of tumors using gene expression data. J Am Stat Assoc 2002; 97: 77–87.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Rosenwald A, Wright G, Chan WC, Connors JM, Campo E, Fisher RI et al. The use of molecular profiling to predict survival after chemotherapy for diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1937–1947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Simon R, Radmacher MD, Dobbin K, McShane LM . Pitfalls in the analysis of DNA microarray data: class prediction methods. J Natl Cancer Instit 2003; 95: 14–18.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. van'tVeer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AAM, Mao M et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 2002; 415: 530–536.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lynch TJ, Bell DW, Sordella R, Gurubhagavatula S, Okimoto RA, Branigan BW . Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 2129–2139.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Paez JG, Janne PA, Lee JC, Tracy S, Greulich H, Gabriel S et al. EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science 2004; 304: 1497–1500.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Simon R, Maitournam A . Evaluating the efficiency of targeted designs for randomized clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10: 6759–6763.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Tsao MS, Sakurada A, Cutz JC et al. Erlotinib in lung cancer – molecular and clinical predictors of outcome. N Engl J Med 2005; 353 (2): 133–144.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Roses AD . Pharmacogenetics and drug development: the path to safer and more effective drugs. Nat Rev Genet 2004; 5: 645–656.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bonner J, Giralt J, Harari PM, Cohen C, Jones C, Sur RK et al. Phase III study of high dose radiation with or without cetuximab in the treatment of locoregionally advanced squamous cell cancer of the head and neck. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 5507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sargent DJ, Conley BA, Allegra C, Collette L . Clinical trial designs for predictive marker validation in cancer treatment trials. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (9): 2020–2027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Baselga J . Herceptin alone or in combination with chemotherapy in the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: pivotal trials. Oncology 2001; 61 (Suppl 2): 14–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Eiermann W . Trastuzumab combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: pivotal trial data. Ann Oncol 2001; 12 (Suppl 1): S57–S62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Weiss ST, Silverman EK, Palmer LJ . Case–control association studies in pharmacogenetics. Pharmacogenomics J 2001; 1: 157–158.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Pritchard JK, Rosenberg NA . Use of unlinked genetic markers to detect population stratification in association studies. Am J Hum Genet 1999; 65: 220–228.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hetherington S, Hughes AR, Mosteller M, Shortino D, Baker KL, Spreen W . Genetic variations in HLA-B region and hypersensitivity reactions to abacavir. Lancet 2002; 359: 1121–1122.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mallal S, Nolan D, Witt C, Masel G, Martin AM, Moore C et al. Association between presence of HLA-B*5701, HLA-DR7, and HLA-DQ3 and hypersensitivity to HIV-1 reverse transcriptase inhibitor avacavir. Lancet 2002; 359: 727–732.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hughes AR, Mosteller M, Bansal AT, Davies K, Haneline SA, Lai EH et al. Association of genetic variations in HLA-B region with hypersensitivity to abacavir in some but not all populations. Pharmacogenomics 2004; 5 (2): 203–211.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the reviewers for numerous important suggestions for improving the manuscript. This research work was supported by the CDER RSR #03-12 funds awarded to Dr Sue-Jane Wang by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration.

Author information

Author notes

  1. R Simon and S-J Wang: Both authors contributed equally to this manuscript.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Cancer Treatment & Diagnosis, Biometric Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA

    R Simon

  2. Office of Biostatistics, Office of Pharmacoepidemiology and Statistical Science, Center for Drug Evaluation & Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD, USA

    S-J Wang

Authors
  1. R Simon
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S-J Wang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R Simon.

Additional information

Duality of interest

None declared

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simon, R., Wang, SJ. Use of genomic signatures in therapeutics development in oncology and other diseases. Pharmacogenomics J 6, 166–173 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.tpj.6500349

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.tpj.6500349

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links