Drug–diagnostic co-development: challenges and issues

References

• Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest •• of considerable interest
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Paving the way for personalized medicine. 2013 [cited 2015 Jun 10]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/PersonalizedMedicine/UCM372421.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Mandrekar SJ, Sargent DJ. Clinical trial designs for predictive biomarker validation: theoretical considerations and practical challenges. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4027–4034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

• This study describes several alternative trial designs other than enrichment and unselected designs.

• Freidlin B, McShane LM, Korn EL. Randomized clinical trials with biomarkers: design issues. Jnci. 2010;102:152–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

• This study describes several alternative trial designs other than enrichment and unselected designs.

• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry; enrichment strategies for clinical trials to support approval of human drugs and biological products: draft guidance. 2012. [cited 2015 Jun 10]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM332181.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Medicines Agency. Reflection paper on methodological issues associated with pharmacogenomic biomarkers in relation to clinical development and patient selection. 2011. [ cited 2015 Jun 10]. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2011/07/WC500108672.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, et al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2507–2516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McArthur GA, Chapman PB, Robert C, et al. Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAFV600E and BRAFV600K mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM-3): extended follow-up of a phase 3, randomised, open-label study. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:323–332.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauschild A, Grob JJ, Demidov LV, et al. Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;380:358–365.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flaherty KT, Robert C, Hersey P, et al. Improved survival with MEK inhibition in BRAF-mutated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:107–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flaherty KT, Infante JR, Daud A, et al. Combined BRAF and MEK Inhibition in Melanoma with BRAF V600 Mutations. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1694–1703.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw AT, Kim DW, Nakagawa K, et al. Crizotinib versus chemotherapy in advanced ALK-positive lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:2385–2394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw AT, Kim DW, Mehra R, et al. Ceritinib in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1189–1197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seto T, Kiura K, Nishio M, et al. CH5424802 (RO5424802) for patients with ALK-rearranged advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-001JP study): a single-arm, open-label, phase 1–2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:590–598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishida T, Jo T, Takemoto S, et al. Dose-intensified chemotherapy alone or in combination with mogamulizumab in newly diagnosed aggressive adult T-cell leukaemia-lymphoma: a randomized phase II study. Br J Haematol. 2015;169:672–682.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gulick RM, Lalezari J, Goodrich J, et al. Maraviroc for previously treated patients with R5 HIV-1 infection. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1429–1441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sierra-Madero J, Di Perri G, Wood R, et al. Efficacy and safety of maraviroc versus efavirenz, both with zidovudine/lamivudine: 96-week results from the MERIT study. HIV Clin Trials. 2010;11:125–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim D-W, Ahn M-J, Shi Y, et al. Results of a global phase II study with crizotinib in advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol. 201230(15_suppl):abstract 7533. 2012 ASCO Annual Meeting Abstracts.
   Google Scholar
• Ishida T, Joh T, Uike N, et al. Defucosylated anti-CCR4 monoclonal antibody (KW-0761) for relapsed adult T-cell leukemia-lymphoma: a multicenter phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:837–842.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bollag G, Hirth P, Tsai J, et al. Clinical efficacy of a RAF inhibitor needs broad target blockade in BRAF-mutant melanoma. Nature. 2010;467:596–599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falchook GS, Long GV, Kurzrock R, et al. Dabrafenib in patients with melanoma, untreated brain metastases, and other solid tumors: a phase 1 dose-escalation trial. Lancet. 2012;379:1893–1901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilmartin AG, Bleam MR, Groy A, et al. GSK1120212 (JTP-74057) is an inhibitor of MEK activity and activation with favorable pharmacokinetic properties for sustained in vivo pathway inhibition. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:989–1000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ascierto PA, Minor D, Ribas A, et al. Phase II trial (BREAK-2) of the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (GSK2118436) in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:3205–3211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robert C, Karaszewska B, Schachter J. Improved overall survival in melanoma with combined dabrafenib and trametinib. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:30–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soda M, Choi YL, Enomoto M, et al. Identification of the transforming EML4–ALK fusion gene in non-small-cell lung cancer. Nature. 2007;448:561–566.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weickhardt AJ, Camidge DR. The therapeutic potential of anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors in lung cancer: rationale and clinical evidence. Clin Invest. 2011;1:1119–1126.
   Google Scholar
• Camidge DR, Bang YJ, Kwak EL, et al. Activity and safety of crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated results from a phase 1 study. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:1011–1019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwak EL, Bang YJ, Camidge DR, et al. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibition in non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1693–1703.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw AT, Yeap BY, Solomon BJ, et al. Effect of crizotinib on overall survival in advanced NSCLC harboring anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene rearrangement: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2011;11:1004–1012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Medical Review(s) (crizotinib, Application number 202570Orig1s000). 2011. [cited 2015 Jun 10]. Available from: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2011/202570Orig1s000MedR.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Jones D, O’Hara C, Kraus MD, et al. Expression pattern of T-cell-associated chemokine receptors and their chemokines correlates with specific subtypes of T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2000;96:685–690.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishida T, Inagaki H, Utsunomiya A, et al. CXC chemokine receptor 3 and CC chemokine receptor 4 expression in T-cell and NK-cell lymphomas with special reference to clinicopathological significance for peripheral T-cell lymphoma, unspecified. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:5494–5500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamamoto K, Utsunomiya A, Tobinai K, et al. Phase I study of KW-0761, a defucosylated humanized anti-CCR4 antibody, in relapsed patients with adult T-cell leukemia-lymphoma and peripheral T-cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1591–1598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogura M, Ishida T, Inagaki H, et al. Multicenter phase II study of mogamulizumab (KW-0761), a defucosylated anti-CC chemokine receptor 4 antibody, in patients with relapsed peripheral T-cell lymphoma and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1157–1163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saag M, Goodrich J, Fätkenheuer G, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of maraviroc in treatment-experienced patients infected with non-R5 HIV-1. J Infect Dis. 2009;199:1638–1647.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper DA, Heera J, Goodrich J, et al. Maraviroc versus efavirenz, both in combination with zidovudine-lamivudine, for the treatment of Antiretroviral-Naive Subjects with CCR5-Tropic HIV-1 Infection. J Infect Dis. 2010;201:803–813.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkin TJ 1, Goetz MB, Leduc R, et al Reanalysis of coreceptor tropism in HIV-1–infected adults using a phenotypic assay with enhanced sensitivity. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:925–928.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshino T, Muro K, Yamaguchi K, et al. Clinical validation of a multiplex kit for RAS mutations in colorectal cancer: Results of the RASKET (RAS KEy testing) prospective, multicenter study. EBioMedicine. 2015;2:317–323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karapetis CS, Khambata-Ford S, Jonker DJ, et al. K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1757–1765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douillard JY, Siena S, Cassidy J, et al. Randomized, phase III trial of panitumumab with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as first-line treatment in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: the PRIME study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4697–4705.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosell R, Carcereny E, Gervais R, et al. Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EURTAC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:239–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sequist LV, Yang JC, Yamamoto N, et al. Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:3327–3334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung KY, Shia J, Kemeny NE, et al. Cetuximab shows activity in colorectal cancer patients with tumors that do not express the epidermal growth factor receptor by immunohistochemistry. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:1803–1810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltz LB, Meropol NJ, Loehrer PJ Sr, et al. Phase II trial of cetuximab in patients with refractory colorectal cancer that expresses the epidermal growth factor receptor. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1201–1208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S, et al. Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:337–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lièvre A, Bachet JB, Le Corre D, et al. KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 2006;66:3992–3995.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lièvre A 1, Bachet JB, Boige V, et al. KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:374–379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amado RG, Wolf M, Peeters M, et al. Wild-type KRAS Is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1626–1634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bokemeyer C, Bondarenko I, Makhson A, et al. Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:663–671.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hecht JR, Mitchell E, Chidiac T, et al. A randomized phase IIIB trial of chemotherapy, bevacizumab, and panitumumab compared with chemotherapy and bevacizumab alone for metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:672–680.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutsem EV, Köhne CH, Hitre E, et al. Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1408–1417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douillard JY, Oliner KS, Siena S, et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1023–1034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price TJ, Peeters M, Kim TW, et al. Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:569–579.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann V, Von Weikersthal LF, Decker T, et al. FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1065–1075.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartzberg LS, Rivera F, Karthaus M, et al. PEAK: a randomized, multicenter phase II study of panitumumab plus modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2240–2247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Class labeling changes to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab (Erbitux) and panitumumab (Vectibix): KRAS Mutations. [Internet]. 2009. [cited 2015 Jan 10]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/OfficeofMedicalProductsandTobacco/CDER/ucm172905.htm
   Google Scholar
• Patterson SD, Cohen N, Karnoub M, et al. Prospective-retrospective biomarker analysis for regulatory consideration: white paper from the industry pharmacogenomics working group. Pharmacogenomics. 2011;12:939–951.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

•• The Industry Pharmacogenomics Working Group provides its perspective on the rationale for the prospective–retrospective analysis of biomarkers for regulatory consideration.

• Taniguchi H, Yamazaki K, Yoshino T, et al. Japanese Society of Medical Oncology Clinical Guidelines: RAS (KRAS/NRAS) mutation testing in colorectal cancer patients. Cancer Sci. 2015;106:324–327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

• This is an English translation of the Japanese guidelines for the testing of RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. It provides summaries of the results of clinical trials testing cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type and mutant RAS.

• Jorissen RN, Walker F, Pouliot N, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor: mechanisms of activation and signalling. Exp Cell Res. 2003;284:31–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen MH, Williams GA, Sridhara R, et al. United States Food and Drug Administration Drug Approval summary: Gefitinib (ZD1839; Iressa) tablets. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:1212–1218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thatcher N, Chang A, Parikh P, et al. Gefitinib plus best supportive care in previously treated patients with refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study (Iressa Survival Evaluation in Lung Cancer). Lancet. 2005;366:1527–1537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giaccone G, Herbst RS, Manegold C, et al. Gefitinib in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III trial–INTACT 1. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:777–784.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst RS, Giaccone G, Schiller JH, et al. Gefitinib in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III trial–INTACT 2. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:785–794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim ES, Hirsh V, Mok T, et al. Gefitinib versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (INTEREST): a randomised phase III trial. Lancet. 2008;372:1809–1818.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maruyama R, Nishiwaki Y, Tamura T, et al. Phase III study, V-15-32, of gefitinib versus docetaxel in previously treated Japanese patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4244–4252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goss G, Ferry D, Wierzbicki R, et al. Randomized phase II study of gefitinib compared with placebo in chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and poor performance status. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2253–2260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park K, Goto K. A review of the benefit-risk profile of gefitinib in Asian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:561–573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepherd FA, Rodrigues Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, et al. Erlotinib in previously treated non–small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:123–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosaka T, Yatabe Y, Endoh H, et al. Mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene in lung cancer: biological and clinical implications. Cancer Res. 2004;64:8919–8923.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shigematsu H, Lin L, Takahashi T, et al. Clinical and biological features associated with epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations in lung cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:339–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch TJ, Bell DW, Sordella R, et al. 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paez JG, Jänne PA, Lee JC, et al. EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science. 2004;304:1497–1500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pao W, Miller V, Zakowski M, et al. EGF receptor gene mutations are common in lung cancers from “never smokers” and are associated with sensitivity of tumors to gefitinib and erlotinib. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:13306–13311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell DW, Lynch TJ, Haserlat SM, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor mutations and gene amplification in non-small-cell lung cancer: molecular analysis of the IDEAL/INTACT gefitinib trials. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8081–8092.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch FR, Varella-Garcia M, Bunn PA Jr, et al. Molecular predictors of outcome with gefitinib in a phase III placebo-controlled study in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:5034–5042.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mok TS, Wu YL, Thongprasert S, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin–paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:947–957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fukuoka M, Wu YL, Thongprasert S, et al. Biomarker analyses and final overall survival results from a phase III, randomized, open-label, first-line study of gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel in clinically selected patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in Asia (IPASS). J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2866–2874.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maemondo M, Inoue A, Kobayashi K, et al. Gefitinib or chemotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2380–2388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitsudomi T, Morita S, Yatabe Y, et al. Gefitinib versus cisplatin plus docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor (WJTOG3405): an open label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:121–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst RS, Prager D, Hermann R, et al. TRIBUTE: a phase III trial of erlotinib hydrochloride (OSI-774) combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5892–5899.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatzemeier U, Pluzanska A, Szczesna A, et al. Phase III study of erlotinib in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine in advanced non–small-cell lung cancer: the Tarceva Lung Cancer Investigation Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1545–1552.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou C 1, Wu YL, Chen G, et al Erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2012;12:735–742.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yap TA, Vidal L, Adam J, et al. Phase I trial of the irreversible EGFR and HER2 kinase inhibitor BIBW 2992 in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3965–3972.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang JC, Shih JY, Su WC, et al. Afatinib for patients with lung adenocarcinoma and epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (LUX-Lung 2): a phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:539–548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon R. Clinical trial designs for evaluating the medical utility of prognostic and predictive biomarkers in oncology. Per Med. 2010;7:33–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jorgensen JT. Companion diagnostics in oncology - current status and future aspects. Oncology. 2013;85:59–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindeman NI, Cagle PT, Beasley MB, et al. Molecular testing guideline for selection of lung cancer patients for EGFR and ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors: guideline from the College of American Pathologists, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and Association for Molecular Pathology. J Mol Diagn. 2013;15:415–453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

• This guideline sets the ground rules for routine molecular testing in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

• Camidge DR, Kono SA, Flacco A, et al. Optimizing the detection of lung cancer patients harboring anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements potentially suitable for ALK inhibitor treatment. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16:5581–5590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yi ES, Boland JM, Maleszewski JJ, et al. Correlation of IHC and FISH for ALK gene rearrangement in non-small cell lung carcinoma: IHC score algorithm for FISH. J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6:459–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Japan Lung Cancer Society. Guidance for ALK gene testing in lung cancer patients (Version 1.2 November 2, 2011) [Internet]. 2011. [cited 2015 Jun 10]. Available from: https://www.haigan.gr.jp/uploads/photos/641.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Fridlyand J, Simon RM, Walrath JC, et al. Considerations for the successful co-development of targeted cancer therapies and companion diagnostics. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2013;12:743–755.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

•• This study provides potential co-development strategies not covered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidance including how to determine when clinical studies should be limited to biomarker-positive patients.

• Lesko LJ, Salerno RA, Spear B, et al. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics in drug development and regulatory decision making: report of the first FDA-PWG-PhRMA-DruSafe Workshop. J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;43:342–358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

• This study was the first to report the retrospective validation of the clinical predictive value of a genomic biomarker.