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

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. Cancer Res; 76(16); 4627-36. ©2016 AACR.

A meta-analysis of threats to valid clinical inference in preclinical research of sunitinib.

Poor study methodology leads to biased measurement of treatment effects in preclinical research. We used available sunitinib preclinical studies to evaluate relationships between study design and experimental tumor volume effect sizes. We identified published animal efficacy experiments where sunitinib monotherapy was tested for effects on tumor volume. Effect sizes were extracted alongside experimental design elements addressing threats to valid clinical inference. Reported use of practices to address internal validity threats was limited, with no experiments using blinded outcome assessment. Most malignancies were tested in one model only, raising concerns about external validity. We calculate a 45% overestimate of effect size across all malignancies due to potential publication bias. Pooled effect sizes for specific malignancies did not show apparent relationships with effect sizes in clinical trials, and we were unable to detect dose-response relationships. Design and reporting standards represent an opportunity for improving clinical inference.

Threats to validity in the design and conduct of preclinical efficacy studies: a systematic review of guidelines for in vivo animal experiments.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of medical interventions introduced into clinical development prove unsafe or ineffective. One prominent explanation for the dismal success rate is flawed preclinical research. We conducted a systematic review of preclinical research guidelines and organized recommendations according to the type of validity threat (internal, construct, or external) or programmatic research activity they primarily address. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Google, and the EQUATOR Network website for all preclinical guideline documents published up to April 9, 2013 that addressed the design and conduct of in vivo animal experiments aimed at supporting clinical translation. To be eligible, documents had to provide guidance on the design or execution of preclinical animal experiments and represent the aggregated consensus of four or more investigators. Data from included guidelines were independently extracted by two individuals for discrete recommendations on the design and implementation of preclinical efficacy studies. These recommendations were then organized according to the type of validity threat they addressed. A total of 2,029 citations were identified through our search strategy. From these, we identified 26 guidelines that met our eligibility criteria--most of which were directed at neurological or cerebrovascular drug development. Together, these guidelines offered 55 different recommendations. Some of the most common recommendations included performance of a power calculation to determine sample size, randomized treatment allocation, and characterization of disease phenotype in the animal model prior to experimentation. CONCLUSIONS: By identifying the most recurrent recommendations among preclinical guidelines, we provide a starting point for developing preclinical guidelines in other disease domains. We also provide a basis for the study and evaluation of preclinical research practice. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

A novel 4EHP-GIGYF2 translational repressor complex is essential for mammalian development.

The binding of the eukaryotic initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) to the mRNA 5' cap structure is a rate-limiting step in mRNA translation initiation. eIF4E promotes ribosome recruitment to the mRNA. In Drosophila, the eIF4E homologous protein (d4EHP) forms a complex with binding partners to suppress the translation of distinct mRNAs by competing with eIF4E for binding the 5' cap structure. This repression mechanism is essential for the asymmetric distribution of proteins and normal embryonic development in Drosophila. In contrast, the physiological role of the mammalian 4EHP (m4EHP) was not known. In this study, we have identified the Grb10-interacting GYF protein 2 (GIGYF2) and the zinc finger protein 598 (ZNF598) as components of the m4EHP complex. GIGYF2 directly interacts with m4EHP, and this interaction is required for stabilization of both proteins. Disruption of the m4EHP-GIGYF2 complex leads to increased translation and perinatal lethality in mice. We propose a model by which the m4EHP-GIGYF2 complex represses translation of a subset of mRNAs during embryonic development, as was previously reported for d4EHP.