Design and Reporting of Targeted Anticancer Preclinical Studies: A Meta-Analysis of Animal Studies Investigating Sorafenib Antitumor Efficacy

Abstract

The validity of preclinical studies of candidate therapeutic agents has been questioned given their limited ability to predict their fate in clinical development, including due to design flaws and reporting bias. In this study, we examined this issue in depth by conducting a meta-analysis of animal studies investigating the efficacy of the clinically approved kinase inhibitor, sorafenib. MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS databases were searched for all animal experiments testing tumor volume response to sorafenib monotherapy in any cancer published until April 20, 2012. We estimated effect sizes from experiments assessing changes in tumor volume and conducted subgroup analyses based on prespecified experimental design elements associated with internal, construct, and external validity. The meta-analysis included 97 experiments involving 1,761 animals. We excluded 94 experiments due to inadequate reporting of data. Design elements aimed at reducing internal validity threats were implemented only sporadically, with 66% reporting animal attrition and none reporting blinded outcome assessment or concealed allocation. Anticancer activity against various malignancies was typically tested in only a small number of model systems. Effect sizes were significantly smaller when sorafenib was tested against either a different active agent or combination arm. Trim and fill suggested a 37% overestimation of effect sizes across all malignancies due to publication bias. We detected a moderate dose-response in one clinically approved indication, hepatocellular carcinoma, but not in another approved malignancy, renal cell carcinoma, or when data were pooled across all malignancies tested. In support of other reports, we found that few preclinical cancer studies addressed important internal, construct, and external validity threats, limiting their clinical generalizability. Our findings reinforce the need to improve guidelines for the design and reporting of preclinical cancer studies.

Sorafenib Induces Pyroptosis in Macrophages and Triggers Natural Killer Cell–Mediated Cytotoxicity Against Hepatocellular Carcinoma

“…In vitro as well as in vivo experiments using sorafenib enabled us to uncover the MФ–NK cell crosstalk and identify actual response‐predicting biomarkers such as IL1B and IL18. The sorafenib‐induced immunological changes were also present at lower doses, although HCC tumor growth inhibition was dose‐dependent . Previous trials had described high variability of the sorafenib biodistribution comparing mice and humans .…”

Preclinical efficacy in therapeutic area guidelines from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency: a cross‐sectional study

“…Better regulatory guidance on the design of preclinical efficacy studies might help reduce the burdens and costs associated with attrition during drug development. Just recently, the need for more robust study designs in preclinical efficacy studies was highlighted (Mattina et al, 2016). Regulatory guidelines could strongly support these activities (Begley and Ellis, 2012).…”

Correlation between secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine protein expression and the prognosis of postoperative patients exhibiting esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

“…Recent studies have demonstrated the particularly complicated processes involved in the occurrence and development of tumors (17,18). It may be caused by the regulation of cell growth and proliferation (19).…”