Despite major advances in modern drug discovery and development, the number of new drug approvals has not kept pace with the increased cost of their development. Increasingly, innovative uses of biomarkers are employed in an attempt to speed new drugs to market. Still, widespread adoption of biomarkers is impeded by limited experience interpreting biomarker data and an unclear regulatory climate. Key differences preclude the direct application of existing validation paradigms for drug analysis to biomarker research. Following the AAPS 2003 Biomarker Workshop (J. W. Lee, R. S. Weiner, J. M. Sailstad, et al. Method validation and measurement of biomarkers in nonclinical and clinical samples in drug development. A conference report. Pharm Res 22:499-511, 2005), these and other critical issues were addressed. A practical, iterative, "fit-for-purpose" approach to biomarker method development and validation is proposed, keeping in mind the intended use of the data and the attendant regulatory requirements associated with that use. Sample analysis within this context of fit-for-purpose method development and validation are well suited for successful biomarker implementation, allowing increased use of biomarkers in drug development.

CP-675,206 can be administered safely to humans as a single IV dose up to 15 mg/kg, resulting in breaking of peripheral immune tolerance to self-tissues and antitumor activity in melanoma.

Purpose: PF299804 is a potent, orally available, irreversible inhibitor of tyrosine kinase human epidermal growth factor receptors (HER) 1 (EGFR), HER2, and HER4. This first-in-human study investigated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of PF299804 in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Experimental Design: PF299804 was administered once daily continuously (schedule A) and intermittently (schedule B). Dose escalation proceeded until intolerable toxicities occurred. Skin biopsies were taken predose and after 14 days of treatment to establish a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship. Tumor response was measured once every 2 cycles. Efficacy was correlated with tumor genotypes in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Results: 121 patients were included (111 in schedule A, 10 in schedule B). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 45 mg/d. Dose-limiting toxicities included stomatitis and skin toxicities. Most adverse events were mild and comprised skin toxicities, fatigue, and gastrointestinal side-effects including diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting. Pharmacokinetic analyses revealed dose-dependent increases in PF299804 exposure associated with target inhibition in skin biopsy samples. Fifty-seven patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were treated in this study. Four patients, all previously treated with gefitinib or erlotinib (2 with exon 19 deletions, 1 with exon 20 insertion, 1 mutational status unknown), had a partial response to PF299804. Conclusions: The MTD of PF299804 is 45 mg/d. Both continuous and intermittent treatment schedules were well tolerated, and encouraging signs of antitumor activity were observed in gefitinib/erlotinib treated NSCLC patients. Clin Cancer Res; 17(5); 1131–9. ©2011 AACR.