DNA Damage Response (DDR) Market By Therapeutic Class (PARP Inhibitors, ATM/ATR Inhibitors, WEE1 Inhibitors, CHK1/CHK2 Inhibitors, POLQ and Others); By Indication (Ovarian Cancer, Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, Others); By End User (Academic & Research Institutes, Cancer Hospitals, Private Oncology Clinics, Diagnostic Labs); By Geography, Segment Revenue Estimation, Forecast, 2024–2030

Introduction And Strategic Context

The Global DNA Damage Response (DDR) Market is projected to grow steadily, with an estimated value of USD 5.8 billion in 2024 and forecasted to reach USD 11.2 billion by 2030 , reflecting a CAGR of 11.4% during the 2024–2030 period (inferred estimate).

 

DNA damage response mechanisms form the backbone of modern oncology and precision medicine. They include pathways like homologous recombination (HR), non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), mismatch repair (MMR), and base excision repair (BER). Drugs targeting DDR pathways—such as PARP inhibitors, ATM/ATR inhibitors, DNA-PK inhibitors, and CHK1/CHK2 inhibitors —are now frontline or combination therapies in cancers with high genomic instability.

 

The market’s strategic relevance is rising for three reasons:

• Oncology pipeline integration – DDR inhibitors are increasingly paired with immuno-oncology drugs and traditional chemotherapy.

• Biomarker-driven therapies – BRCA1/2, HRD (homologous recombination deficiency), and MSI-H (microsatellite instability-high) status now guide treatment decisions, making companion diagnostics central to adoption.

• Policy and funding – Governments and cancer institutes are directing grants and fast-track approvals toward DDR-based therapeutics because they address previously untreatable tumor subtypes.

 

Stakeholders across this market form a diverse ecosystem. Pharmaceutical innovators (AstraZeneca, Merck KGaA , Pfizer, GSK ) are expanding their DDR drug pipelines, while diagnostics companies are building companion assays to ensure patient stratification. Hospitals and cancer institutes are early adopters, with trials testing DDR-drug combinations. Investors and venture capital are targeting biotech startups with novel inhibitors beyond PARP, aiming to capture next-wave oncology revenues.

 

The bigger picture? DDR therapeutics are no longer niche. They’re becoming a core pillar of targeted oncology, reshaping treatment standards across ovarian, breast, prostate, and pancreatic cancers.

 

Market Segmentation And Forecast Scope

The DNA damage response (DDR) market can be segmented across therapeutic class , indication , end user , and geography . Each axis reflects a different part of the commercialization equation — from drug discovery through clinical delivery.

By Therapeutic Class

• PARP Inhibitors: Still dominate the market in 2024, accounting for around 61% of global DDR drug revenue. Used widely in BRCA-mutated ovarian and breast cancers, these agents are now being tested in broader HRD-positive and maintenance settings. Market leaders like olaparib and niraparib have moved into multiple tumor types and are frequently paired with IO agents.

• ATM/ATR Inhibitors: Moving up the curve fast. These drugs exploit replication stress and checkpoint failure, particularly in tumors with ATM loss or TP53 mutations. Phase II/III trials in pancreatic, NSCLC, and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) are driving near-term upside.

• WEE1 and CHK1/CHK2 Inhibitors: Emerging classes. WEE1 inhibition is gaining traction in p53-deficient cancers, while CHK1/2 compounds are being positioned as radiosensitizers or IO enhancers. Most programs are in early-to-mid stage, but the platform value is real — especially when paired with platinum or radiation therapy.

• POLQ and Others: Early-stage, high-upside. These drugs aim at synthetic lethality in HR-deficient tumors beyond BRCA — a strategic move as the industry shifts from gene-specific to repair-function-specific targeting.

By 2027, ATM/ATR and WEE1 classes are projected to drive the next growth wave, while POLQ inhibitors and DNA-PK programs may create breakout wins in niche indications.

 

By Indication

• Ovarian Cancer: Still the anchor indication, where PARP inhibitors first demonstrated commercial success. High-grade serous tumors and BRCA mutations keep ovarian cancer at the center of DDR drug use — but saturation is approaching.

• Breast Cancer: Expanding rapidly, especially in TNBC and HER2-negative patients with HRD or BRCA mutations. Adoption is strongest in the U.S., where companion testing is common in first-line treatment decisions.

• Prostate Cancer: Fastest-growing segment through 2030. Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) with DNA repair defects is a prime use case for PARP, ATR, and WEE1 inhibitors. Biomarker testing is increasingly embedded in prostate cancer workflows.

• Pancreatic Cancer: A high-priority target for DDR-based maintenance therapy. BRCA-mutated pancreatic tumors have poor outcomes with chemo alone, and DDR drugs are starting to show PFS benefits in maintenance settings.

• Others (e.g., lung, endometrial, glioblastoma): These remain in trial phases — but promising. DDR agents are being tested in endometrial tumors with MSI-H, gliomas with replication stress, and even small-cell lung cancer with ATM mutations.

Through 2030, prostate and pancreatic cancers are expected to post the highest DDR-related revenue growth, driven by expanded biomarker screening and earlier therapeutic intervention.

 

By End User

• Academic & Research Institutes: Core to early-stage innovation. These institutions drive first-in-human trials, synthetic lethality screens, and combo studies across high-risk tumor types. Often equipped with in-house genomic labs, they shape DDR adoption logic.

• Specialty Cancer Hospitals: The bridge between trials and mainstream therapy. Most carry approved DDR drugs on formulary and have multidisciplinary teams to match patients to therapy based on genomic profiling. Also, key sites for real-world data collection and patient stratification.

• Private Oncology Clinics: Particularly active in the U.S., Europe, and India. Clinics often rely on external testing, but are strong adopters once biomarker data is available. Focus is on ease of administration, payer alignment, and drug+test integration.

• Diagnostic Laboratories: The gatekeepers of access. Labs offering BRCA, HRD, MSI, and broader repair panel tests enable DDR drug prescriptions. Newer entrants are rolling out functional assays that assess actual DNA repair capacity — a frontier diagnostic layer.

Cancer centers with integrated diagnostics and therapy selection platforms are emerging as the highest-leverage end users for DDR innovation.

 

By Region

• North America: Remains the hub of clinical innovation and regulatory speed. The U.S. leads in DDR trial density, reimbursement for biomarker tests, and early combo approvals. Academic institutions and oncology networks dominate usage.

• Europe: Focused on cross-border trial coordination and early-access programs. Adoption is influenced by country-specific HTAs, which can delay rollout despite EMA approval. Germany, France, and the UK are front-runners, with emphasis on evidence-based sequencing.

• Asia Pacific: The fastest-scaling region. China and Japan are building genomic infrastructure and pushing through local approvals for DDR diagnostics. South Korea is integrating DDR combos into cancer center protocols. India is emerging via private oncology networks and pharma-sponsored trials.

• Latin America and MEA: Early-stage uptake. Brazil and Mexico are building DDR capabilities within academic hospitals. UAE and Saudi Arabia are importing DDR regimens and expanding molecular labs. Broader adoption depends on public-private genomics partnerships and donor support.

By 2026, Asia Pacific is expected to account for over 22% of global DDR trial volume — driven by infrastructure, patient density, and regulatory modernization.

 

Market Trends And Innovation Landscape

DDR-targeted therapies are entering a new phase — not just expanding in number but evolving in complexity. What began with PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer has grown into a full-fledged race to exploit synthetic lethality across cancer types. Here’s what’s shaping the landscape right now.

Combination Therapies Are Becoming the Norm

Monotherapy is no longer the ceiling for DDR drugs. The most significant R&D push is around combinations:

• PARP + Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Early data suggests DDR inhibition increases tumor mutational burden, enhancing response to PD-1/PD-L1 drugs. Trials pairing PARP inhibitors with pembrolizumab or durvalumab are underway in triple-negative breast cancer and advanced NSCLC.

• DDR + Radiation or Chemotherapy Since DDR inhibitors impair DNA repair, they amplify the effects of radiation or platinum-based drugs. The strategy is gaining traction in locally advanced or unresectable tumors.

One senior oncologist noted: “In the next 3 years, you’ll rarely see a DDR drug given solo — the clinical logic now leans hard toward synergy.”

 

Beyond PARP: Expanding the Synthetic Lethality Toolbox

Drug developers are aggressively pursuing second-generation DDR targets. A few trends to watch:

• ATR and CHK1/CHK2 inhibitors are showing promising results in cancers with ATM loss or replication stress signatures.

• WEE1 inhibitors (like adavosertib ) are gaining attention in TP53-deficient tumors — common in ovarian, endometrial, and head & neck cancers.

• POLQ inhibition is the next frontier, especially in HR-deficient tumors where error-prone repair becomes a vulnerability.

Some of these assets are being developed as mono-agents, but most are headed straight for combination trial pathways.

 

Biomarker Strategy Is Getting Sharper

The success of DDR drugs is now inseparable from companion diagnostics. Companies are investing in:

• HRD assays that go beyond BRCA mutations — looking at genomic scarring, loss of heterozygosity, and telomeric allelic imbalance.

• Functional diagnostics that assess real-time DNA repair activity in patient samples, offering more dynamic stratification than static mutations.

• Liquid biopsies as a tool to identify emerging resistance mutations, like BRCA reversion, which undercut PARP efficacy.

Expect the line between “ drug ” and “test” to blur further — in many trials, eligibility is now dictated entirely by advanced genomic markers.

 

AI and CRISPR Are Driving Target Discovery

High-throughput CRISPR screens are accelerating the identification of synthetic lethality pairs. AI modeling is also helping map DNA repair dependencies across cancer types. This trend is cutting time from discovery to IND-stage development dramatically.

Some biotech startups are using these tools to build modular DDR drug platforms — designed to plug into the vulnerabilities of specific tumor subtypes identified via computational analysis.

 

M&A and Strategic Partnerships Are Accelerating

Big pharma isn’t just developing in-house — it’s acquiring:

• In 2023, Pfizer deepened its investment in DDR with a $1.5B acquisition of a biotech working on WEE1 and ATR inhibitors.

• AstraZeneca has partnered with multiple diagnostics firms to co-develop HRD testing platforms aligned to its PARP portfolio.

• Merck KGaA recently inked a collaboration to study novel CHK1 inhibitors in glioblastoma.

Innovation is moving faster than infrastructure. The most agile players are those leveraging external R&D through licensing or acquisition.

 

Competitive Intelligence And Benchmarking

The DNA Damage Response market is currently dominated by a tight circle of global pharma giants—but that dominance is being steadily chipped away by nimble biotechs , AI-native startups, and diagnostics innovators. Success in this space is no longer just about drug approvals; it hinges on companion strategies, biomarker leadership, and clinical precision.

AstraZeneca

AstraZeneca remains the benchmark. Its blockbuster PARP inhibitor, part of a long-standing oncology portfolio, set the pace for DDR therapeutics. But what truly sets them apart is the depth of clinical integration : they’ve built companion diagnostics (with Myriad Genetics and Foundation Medicine), invested in biomarker discovery, and now co-develop DDR + IO combination therapies. Their expansion into prostate and pancreatic cancer further cements their first-mover edge.

Strategically, AstraZeneca doesn’t just sell a drug — it sells a full ecosystem built around HRD biology.

 

Merck KGaA

Merck’s DDR program revolves around ATR and DNA-PK inhibition . While less visible than AstraZeneca’s portfolio, it’s deeply embedded in Phase I/II oncology trials targeting tumors with replication stress. The company has leaned heavily into collaborative R&D , using partnerships with biotech firms and academic centers to accelerate proof-of-concept.

Merck also differentiates itself with its focus on rare and aggressive cancers , including glioblastoma and sarcoma, where DDR targeting could fill major therapeutic gaps.

 

Pfizer

Pfizer has doubled down on DDR through M&A and licensing . It has a foot in the WEE1 space via recent acquisitions and is exploring multimodal combinations that include checkpoint inhibition and antibody-drug conjugates. One advantage Pfizer brings is scale — they have the infrastructure to rapidly push promising molecules into global Phase III trials.

Their strength lies not in being first, but in being fast and expansive once a mechanism shows promise.

 

GSK

GSK has been evolving its oncology focus, and DDR is a central pillar. It holds a position in the PARP class and is actively exploring combo regimens with PD-1 inhibitors and CDK4/6 agents . Their strategy is distinct: heavy investment in real-world evidence and post-market data collection to expand label indications.

Also notable is GSK’s presence in women’s health cancers, where DDR drugs are frequently deployed — ovarian, endometrial , and triple-negative breast cancer.

 

Repare Therapeutics

A biotech standout, Repare is pioneering a CRISPR-based synthetic lethality platform . It has early-stage candidates in POLQ inhibition , one of the hottest emerging DDR targets. The company’s precision-first model and early partnerships with Roche and Bristol Myers Squibb position it as a licensing powerhouse — not a head-to-head commercial rival yet, but certainly a future acquisition target.

They represent the new breed of DDR innovators — software-driven, biologically agile, and IP-focused.

 

Artios Pharma

This UK-based biotech is gaining traction with its DNA-PK and ATM/ATR inhibitors , several of which are in early-phase trials. What makes Artios unique is its focus on intratumoral delivery systems for DDR agents, an attempt to bypass systemic toxicity and maximize localized tumor damage.

Their approach is high-risk, but potentially high-reward — especially for hard-to-treat, radiation-resistant tumors.

 

Benchmark Dynamics

• AstraZeneca leads in clinical maturity and diagnostic integration.

• Pfizer and Merck KGaA dominate expansion into next-gen DDR targets (ATR, WEE1).

• Repare and Artios are shaping the early-stage innovation funnel.

• GSK e xcels in post-approval expansion and real-world data strategy.

What’s emerging is a two-tiered competition: legacy pharma refining the clinical playbook, while focused biotechs bet on next-gen targets and platform efficiencies.

 

To be honest, the next five years won’t be a race to the first approval — it’ll be a race to the best combination. The winners will be those who master not just the mechanism, but the pairing, the biomarker, and the diagnostic.

 

Regional Landscape And Adoption Outlook

Adoption of DNA damage response (DDR) therapies isn’t evenly spread — it reflects regional strengths in oncology infrastructure, genomic testing, trial density, and regulatory incentives. While North America remains the epicenter of DDR-driven innovation, other regions are starting to catch up, each in their own way.

North America

Still the global leader in DDR drug development and deployment. The U.S. hosts the majority of pivotal DDR trials, from Phase I discovery through to FDA fast-track approvals. Why?

• High genomic literacy among oncologists.

• Strong payer coverage for molecular testing (e.g., BRCA, HRD).

• Integration of diagnostics in standard-of-care pathways.

• Cancer centers of excellence — such as MD Anderson and Memorial Sloan Kettering — run dedicated DDR programs.

Additionally, most real-world data (RWD) registries are U.S.-based, giving drug developers post-market insights that drive label expansion.

In short: North America doesn’t just lead in approvals — it defines clinical norms for DDR drug usage.

 

Europe

Europe mirrors North America in scientific rigor but operates under different constraints. Universal healthcare systems mean cost-effectiveness thresholds and health technology assessments (HTAs) shape access more tightly.

• Countries like Germany, France, and the UK have approved PARP inhibitors and are piloting ATR inhibitors in academic centers.

• NICE and EMA emphasize biomarker validation, slowing rollout of new DDR agents that lack mature companion diagnostics.

That said, Europe excels in multinational collaboration . Initiatives like the Cancer Core Europe Consortium support DDR trials across borders, improving trial recruitment and biomarker harmonization.

Expect faster uptake of DDR combinations in 2026–2027, especially in prostate and endometrial cancer segments.

 

Asia Pacific

The fastest-growing region by far. While drug approvals lag by 12–18 months compared to the U.S., investment in precision oncology is surging.

• China is building genomic infrastructure at scale — national BRCA screening programs, local HRD assays, and partnerships with global pharma.

• Japan and South Korea have approved PARP inhibitors and are entering trials with ATR and WEE1 inhibitors.

• India is still early-stage, but major hospital chains are integrating NGS into oncology — a prerequisite for DDR drug usage.

Local manufacturing and regulatory incentives are driving clinical trial outsourcing to Asia, especially for Phase I DDR candidates.

One likely future scenario: Asia becomes the proving ground for DDR drug combinations in gastric, liver, and head & neck cancers — all regionally prevalent and genomically diverse.

 

Latin America, Middle East, and Africa (LAMEA)

Still underpenetrated but starting to move. DDR therapy adoption here is shaped by two main factors: affordability and infrastructure.

• Brazil and Mexico are ahead of the curve, with leading cancer hospitals participating in international DDR trials.

• Gulf countries (Saudi Arabia, UAE) are importing DDR therapies via public-private partnerships and building genomics labs to enable BRCA testing.

• Sub-Saharan Africa has limited access. Most DDR-related care is still delivered via general oncology regimens, often without genomic testing.

NGOs and cancer foundations are funding awareness programs focused on genetic risk in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers — a gateway to DDR usage in emerging markets.

 

Regional Summary

• North America sets the pace on clinical and commercial fronts.

• Europe leads in harmonized biomarker deployment but moves more cautiously on new mechanisms.

• Asia Pacific is scaling rapidly — expect leapfrogging via digital diagnostics and trial-friendly regulation.

• LAMEA is an investment frontier, with uptake tied closely to health equity initiatives and donor-funded genomics access.

The takeaway? DDR market expansion isn’t just about approvals. It’s about ecosystem readiness — testing, training, reimbursement, and clinical culture all play a role.

 

End-User Dynamics And Use Case

In the DNA Damage Response (DDR) market, uptake isn’t just about drug approvals — it’s about who can operationalize genomic-driven therapy. Different end users face distinct pressures: research volume, infrastructure, diagnostics access, and patient throughput. Let’s look at how each group approaches DDR, and what matters to them.

Academic Research Centers and Cancer Institutes

These are the earliest adopters and often the birthplace of DDR innovation. Most Phase I/II trials happen in these settings. What makes them key?

• In-house molecular pathology labs that run BRCA, HRD, and MSI assays.

• Multidisciplinary tumor boards that can quickly stratify patients based on DDR-relevant mutations.

• Grant-funded research arms that enable first-in-human trials for novel DDR targets like POLQ or DNA-PK.

Their needs? Speed, flexibility in trial protocols, and access to companion diagnostics that can evolve with research.

 

Tertiary Hospitals and Comprehensive Cancer Centers

This group bridges clinical research and real-world treatment. Many have approved PARP inhibitors on formulary and are adding ATR, WEE1, and CHK1/2 agents via expanded access programs or combo trial arms.

• They're focused on treatment algorithms — deciding when to sequence DDR drugs after chemo or IO therapy.

• They need decision support tools integrated into EMRs to flag patients with qualifying biomarkers.

• Patient education is also a big lift — explaining why a genetic mutation can drive therapy decisions is still new for many oncology teams.

The hospitals doing this well are those that have embedded molecular tumor boards into their standard oncology workflow.

 

Private Oncology Clinics and Networks

In regions like the U.S., India, or Germany, these clinics are starting to prescribe DDR agents more routinely — but the adoption curve varies.

• Diagnostics are often outsourced, and test result turnaround time can delay treatment decisions.

• Reimbursement hurdles exist for non-BRCA testing (like full HRD or ATM status).

• Still, demand is growing — especially in breast and prostate cancer , where DDR drugs are increasingly mainstream.

They value streamlined solutions: co-packaged test+drug offerings, easy-to-read biomarker reports, and automated patient eligibility screening tools.

 

Diagnostic Laboratories and Genomic Testing Companies

These are the real gatekeepers. DDR drug use is gated by detection — no BRCA or HRD readout, no prescription.

• Large players like Foundation Medicine and Tempus are expanding DDR biomarker panels , integrating BRCA1/2, ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 into multi-cancer NGS reports.

• Some labs are also offering functional HRD assays that go beyond sequencing, giving a real-time picture of DNA repair proficiency.

Their commercial model is shifting — from being “testing vendors” to being drug-enabling platforms .

 

Use Case Highlight

A leading cancer center in South Korea launched a precision oncology pilot focused on advanced pancreatic cancer — a notoriously tough indication. Standard chemo had plateaued. The team screened patients using a broad genomic panel that included BRCA1/2, ATM, and HRD status.

Roughly 14% qualified for DDR-based therapy. These patients were treated with a PARP inhibitor + ATR inhibitor combo under a compassionate use program.

Six months in, early-stage results showed improved progression-free survival compared to standard chemo. Importantly, over 90% of patients had their treatment plan altered based on the DDR findings.

The program is now being scaled across multiple hospital branches — with funding from both the Ministry of Health and pharma partners.

What started as a research pilot became a new standard-of-care pathway — all driven by genomics.

 

Bottom line: End-user dynamics in DDR are rapidly evolving. But a common thread across all settings? Access to diagnostics, simplicity of interpretation, and clinical decision support. The next wave of DDR drugs will succeed only if the ecosystem makes it easy for oncologists to act — not just discover.

 

Recent Developments + Opportunities & Restraints

The past two years have seen an inflection point in the DNA Damage Response (DDR) market — not just in pipeline depth, but in how regulators, biotech, and diagnostics firms are aligning around combination strategies and biomarker-guided therapy. At the same time, operational challenges are slowing broader adoption, especially outside academic centers.

Recent Developments (Last 2 Years)

• Pfizer acquired ReVolve Therapeutics (2024), a preclinical biotech developing WEE1 and ATR inhibitors , in a $1.5B deal. The acquisition signals Pfizer’s aggressive move beyond PARP into next-gen DDR targets.

• AstraZeneca expanded its partnership with Foundation Medicine (2023) to co-develop HRD diagnostics aligned with its DDR pipeline. The collaboration is now supporting trials in prostate and pancreatic cancer.

• GSK launched a Phase III trial for its new PARP inhibitor in metastatic prostate cancer , combining it with PD-1 immunotherapy. The trial includes HRD-negative patients, testing broader use cases.

• Repare Therapeutics announced early human data for its POLQ inhibitor (RP-6306) in HR-deficient breast and ovarian cancers. Responses in heavily pretreated patients were encouraging.

• China’s NMPA approved a domestic HRD companion diagnostic (2023), co-developed by Burning Rock Biotech, for use with olaparib in ovarian cancer — streamlining DDR drug rollout in Asia.

 

Opportunities

• Expansion Beyond BRCA:
  So far, DDR therapies are mostly tied to BRCA mutations. But with new tools for detecting genomic instability and HRD , the eligible patient population is poised to widen. Companies developing multi-gene panels or functional assays are in a strong position to shape access.

• Synthetic Lethality Combinations:
  Next-gen DDR drugs — WEE1, ATR, POLQ — are entering trials as combo agents. These regimens are designed to hit tumors with redundant repair mechanisms , opening up new indications like glioblastoma, endometrial cancer, and TP53-mutated tumors.

• Asia-Pacific Expansion:
  China, South Korea, and Japan are actively funding precision oncology programs . Local approvals for BRCA testing and DDR agents are speeding up. With high patient volumes and genomics infrastructure ramping, Asia is expected to become a major commercial growth zone by 2026.

 

Restraints

• High Cost and Diagnostic Complexity:
  DDR drugs are expensive, and so are the tests required to use them correctly. Many smaller hospitals don’t have access to advanced NGS or HRD assays. This limits adoption outside of major cancer centers.

• Emerging Resistance Mechanisms:
  PARP resistance is increasingly seen in relapsed cancers, often due to BRCA reversion mutations or compensatory repair pathways. This is pushing the field toward combination therapy, but also raising questions about durability and sequencing .

 

7.1. Report Coverage Table

Report Attribute	Details
Forecast Period	2024 – 2030
Market Size Value in 2024	USD 5.8 Billion
Revenue Forecast in 2030	USD 11.2 Billion
Overall Growth Rate	CAGR of 11.4% (2024 – 2030)
Base Year for Estimation	2024
Historical Data	2019 – 2023
Unit	USD Million, CAGR (2024 – 2030)
Segmentation	By Therapeutic Class, By Indication, By End User, By Geography
By Therapeutic Class	PARP Inhibitors, ATM/ATR Inhibitors, WEE1 Inhibitors, CHK1/CHK2 Inhibitors, POLQ and Others
By Indication	Ovarian Cancer, Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, Others
By End User	Academic & Research Institutes, Cancer Hospitals, Private Oncology Clinics, Diagnostic Labs
By Region	North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East & Africa
Country Scope	U.S., Canada, Germany, U.K., China, India, Japan, Brazil, South Korea, UAE
Market Drivers	- Rise of synthetic lethality as a clinical strategy - Increasing use of BRCA and HRD testing - Expanding combination trials and biomarker-guided oncology approvals
Customization Option	Available upon request