Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
WORKSHOP SUMMARY 101 party payors more likely, he added. Finally, he pointed out that biomarker- based trial designs will narrow down the population most likely to benefit and therefore reduce sample size and toxicity, and provide opportunities for enrollment in other trials. Concluding Remarks In final closing comments before adjourning the meeting, planning committee co-chairs Drs. Moses and Mendelsohn both commended the quality of the presentations and subsequent discussions. Dr. Mendelsohn remarked that a valuable outcome from the meeting was âeducating each other in this room.â For example, âclearly there was tremendous cross com- munication between the people that are in [the molecular bioimaging] field and the people who want to use [the technologies of ] that field but are not in it,â he said. Dr. Mendelsohn also noted one important omission in the workshop. The planning committee had hoped to address the topic of sharing intel- lectual property in greater detail, but the expert invited to speak about i Ântellectual property issues unfortunately had to cancel the week of the meet- ing. Noting that this would be an essential topic for a consensus committee to address, Dr. Mendelsohn asserted that âwe have got to figure out a way to incentivize.â âYou have to show [the stakeholders] that it is to their advantage [to share intellectual property],â he said. Drs. Mendelsohn and Moses both noted that important policy issues had been identified and explored in each session, and that these issues would benefit from further study. Accordingly, this summary of the conference pro- ceedings will serve as input to the deliberations of an Institute of Medicine committee that will develop consensus-based recommendations for moving the field of cancer clinical trials forward. Numerous suggestions were put forth by speakers and discussion groups, including the following: ⢠Consider adaptive methods more often in designing clinical trials. ⢠Consider increased use of Phase 0 trials for addressing early biologi- cal endpoints in patients and for compound triage when multiple compounds are being considered. ⢠Increase efforts to standardize and harmonize imaging methodolo- gies used in clinical trials.